THE HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.21193 OF 2009 Dt.06.10.2009 Between: Ch.Rosaiah ……….Petitioner Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C., represented by its VC & MD, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another. …………..Respondents. Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P.Govind Rajulu Counsel for the respondents: Sri P.Sridhar Reddy. The court made the following: O R D E R: This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to pay the balance gratuity amount to the petitioner from the date of suspension to date of reinstatement i.e., 28.03.1984 to May, 1990 by counting the continuity of service granted in I.D.No.23 of 1989, dt.15.02.1990 and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.” Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset relied on a decision reported in M.RAMA RAO VS. ASST.TRAFFIC MANAGER, APSRTC, CENTRAL BUS STATION, HYDERABAD AND ANOTHER[1] and submitted that having regard to the ratio laid down in the said decision, the impugned action of the respondents is not justified. In the said decision, the respondent was directed to compute the gratuity payable to the petitioner, taking into consideration out of employment period and after so computing, to pay the balance of gratuity to the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for the Corporation has not disputed the fact that the petitioner herein is also similarly situated. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to compute the gratuity and other benefits payable to the petitioner, taking into consideration the period of out of employment, in terms of the award in I.D.No.23 of 1989, dt.15.02.1990 and pay the amounts within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. ___________ G.ROHINI J., Dt.06.10.2009 tjs [1] ) 1998 (2) ALT 534