K.K. Sasidharan, J.

The petitioner challenges the order dated 28 May 2008 dismissing her from service and the subsequent order dated 28 August 2009 rejecting the request to review the earlier order.

The facts:

2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Civil Judge (Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate I Class) vide order dated 16 May 1995. The petitioner worked as Judicial Magistrate at Boothapandi in the District of Kanyakumari.

3. The High Court initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner on receipt of complaint from the members of the local Bar. The High Court framed as many as nine charges against the petitioner. Since the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the charge memo was not satisfactory, a decision was taken to initiate enquiry. Thiru R.Mohandoss, Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu was appointed as Enquiry Officer. The enquiry officer examined as many as five witnesses and marked Exs.P.1 to P.38. The petitioner was examined as D.W.1 and Exs.D.1 to D.7 were marked on her side.

4. The enquiry officer in his final report held that charges 1, 2, 4 and 9 were proved. Thereafter explanation was called for from the petitioner. The High Court, after co