THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.22317 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner was engaged, as Driver, on daily wage basis, on 24.04.1997. When he was driving a bus, an accident took place on 01.07.1999. On that basis, the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bodhan, the 2nd respondent herein, terminated the contract through proceedings, dated 24.07.1999. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent. The appeal was disposed of on 25.03.2000, directing engagement of the petitioner, afresh, as Driver. Complaining that he is denied the benefit of his past service, the petitioner filed I.D.No.46 of 2005 before the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, challenging the order of termination, dated 24.07.1999, as modified by the appellate authority, on 25.03.2000. The I.D. was dismissed through award dated 11.06.2007, on the ground that no enquiry is warranted, for terminating the services of a contractual employee. The petitioner filed W.P.No.24023 of 2007. The Writ Petition was allowed on 23.11.2007 and the matter was remanded to the Labour Court with a specific direction to record a finding, as to the validity of the domestic enquiry. It was also directed that, in case the enquiry is found to be not held, or not valid, the Corporation shall be required to prove its case, as to the misconduct on the part of the petitioner. However, the 2nd respondent did not plead any oral evidence and had simply filed the documents relating to the service of the petitioner. The Labour Court-II dismissed the I.D., through award, dated 12.11.2008, on the ground that the petitioner was already re-engaged, and at this length of time, the validity of the enquiry, cannot be gone into. Hence, this Writ Petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The controversy in this matter is very limited. But the litigation is going on for the past about a decade. The petitioner is no doubt a driver engaged on daily wage basis. He was terminated on 24.07.1999, alleging acts of misconduct. This Court held in G.Venkata Rao v. Depot Manager, APSRTC, Visakhapatnam Depot[1], that whenever, an employee whether regular, contractual or engaged on daily wages, is punished for the acts of misconduct, show cause notice/charge sheet must be served and domestic enquiry must be conducted. Admittedly, in this case, no such enquiry was conducted. The petitioner is already re-appointed, may be on daily wages. His limited grievance is about the counting of his service between the date of termination and the date of re-engagement. This aspect is no longer res integra, and this Court in identical cases held that the benefit of past service cannot be denied, though no back wages were awarded. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed, and the impugned award is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner shall be entitled for the continuity of service between 24.07.1999 and the date of his re-engagement, but without the benefit of any back wages. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.07.09.2010. GJ [1] 2008 (5) ALD 439