THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.12867 OF 2011 DATED: 28-04-2011. Between A.Karunakar … Petitioner And 1.The Divisional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad Division, CBS, Hyderabad and another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.12867 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not ordering re-engagement with continuity of service of the petitioner as contract Conductor, as illegal, unjust and consequently direct the respondents to treat the 1st respondent proceedings, dated 21- 01-2010 as re-instatement of the petitioner with continuity of service and attendant benefits. 2. Brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed as contract Driver in APSRTC. After some time, he was terminated from service on the ground of absenteeism. Subsequently, he filed appeal before the 1st respondent, who passed proceedings, dated 21-01-2010 ordering his re-engagement as fresh conductor. The grievance of the petitioner is that while issuing orders of re-engagement, the respondents did not extend the benefit of continuity of service. 3. A regular departmental enquiry was conducted for the mis conduct of the absence of the petitioner for 10 days. The disciplinary authority accepting the report of the Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of mis conduct and ordered for removal. On appeal, the impugned order was passed. 4. It is not the case of conducting enquiry without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. Enquiry was conducted in accordance with rules and regulations of the corporation. Therefore, the only question to be considered in this writ petition is whether the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority is in consonance with the proved misconduct alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner was absent for 10 days without there being any application for grant of leave. That fact was also admitted by the petitioner. The reason given by the petitioner is that due to death of his father, he could not attend the duties. In such circumstances, it is not expected from a person, like the petitioner to apply for leave because he was in calamity due to death of his father. Therefore, the appellate authority ought to have given the benefit of continuity of service as it is not shown to be a serious misconduct so as to impose severe punishment. 5. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of modifying the impugned order that the petitioner shall be re-instated into service with continuity of service only for the purpose of regularization. He is not entitled to any monetary or any other benefits by virtue of this order. No costs. -------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 28-04-2011 Hsd