IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 10049 of 2000 Between: 1 A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep by its Depot Manager, Srikakulam -I, Depot, Srikakulam. 2 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rep by its Presiding Officer, Visakhapatnam. 2 Mudda Ganesh, S/o. Late Bangaraiah, Pedda Bandlipuram, S.C.Street, Srikakulam. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ or direction or order particularly one in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records relating to ID No.92 of 1997 dt. 27.10.1999 on the file of 1st Respondent and quash the same and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:C.APPAIAH SHARMA(SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORDER : The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to I.D. No.92 of 19097, dated 27.10.1999 on the file of respondent No.1 and to quash the same. 2. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation is the petitioner herein and it filed the present writ petition questioning the award dated 27.10.1999 passed by the Labour Court, Visakhapatnam in I.D. No.92 of 1997, whereby the respondent/petitioner was directed to be reinstated into service with continuity of service and back wages for a period of one year with effect from 13.01.1998. 3. The facts are that at the time of recruitment as a casual driver, respondent No.2 submitted his 5th class record sheet for the purpose of determining his date of birth and as he fulfils the age qualification he was appointed as a driver. Thereafter it came to light that the same is a bogus certificate and he never studied 5th class. On the basis of the same, the petitioner was kept under suspension and a charge memo was also issued and after holding an enquiry he was removed from out of service. The same was questioned by raising a dispute before the Labour Court and the same was numbered as I.D. No.92 of 1997 and as stated supra, the Labour Court while setting aside the said order of removal passed by the disciplinary authority, ordered his reinstatement. 4. Heard the learned standing counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent. 5. The certificate produced by respondent No.2 is only for the purpose of determination of the age and it is not for the purpose of establishing that he passed or studied 5th Class. In fact for appointing any individual as a driver, there was no educational qualification required and the only requirement for the purpose of appointment of any individual as a driver is that he should be able to read and write. When there is no educational qualification, it is not known as to how the authorities have felt that he produced a false study certificate. As stated supra, the said study certificate is only for the purpose of determining the age of the petitioner. The Labour Court has gone in detail into the said aspect in holding that the petitioner is entitled to be continued in service, which in my considered view is perfectly justified. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 24, 2009 KSH