HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 788 OF 2005 Between: K.Chengalarayadu S/o late Gangaiah ………….Appellant AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Tirupathi-II Depot ………….Respondent JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Challenging the order-dated 28.08.2003 passed in Writ Petition No. 17966 of 2003 by a learned single Judge of this Court, the present Writ Appeal is filed. Brief facts of the case are that on certain allegations, charges were framed against the appellant and after conducting enquiry he was removed from service and the same was confirmed by the review authorities of the respondent-Corporation. After that the appellant against the order of removal, raised an industrial dispute vide I.D.No. 108 of 1996 under Section 2(A)2 of the Industrial Disputes Act and the Tribunal by award dated 31.3.1998 granted relief of reinstatement with continuity of service and other attendant benefits but rejected the claim of backwages. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed Writ Petition and a learned Single Judge dismissed the same on the ground of delay. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Appeal is filed. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is entitled for backwages and the Labour Court ought to have granted backwages. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also perused the material made available on record. The Supreme Court in J. K. SYNTHETICS LIMITED VS. AGRAWAL AND ANOTHER[1] in paragraph 21 observed as under: “21. In this case, the Labour Court found that a charge against the employee in respect of a serious misconduct was proved. It, however, felt that the punishment of dismissal was not warranted and therefore, imposed a lesser punishment of withholding the two annual increments. In such circumstances, award of backwages was neither automatic nor consequential. In fact, back wages was not warranted at all.” Following the above judgment of the Supreme Court, the question of awarding backwages does not arise and the labour Court granted relief of reinstatement with continuity of service and other attendant benefits, and rightly rejected the claim of backwages and the same was rightly confirmed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. Hence, we see no reasons to interfere with the order impugned. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J DATE: 13.10.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies. [1] (2007) 2 SCC 433