IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 26859 of 2007 Between: N. Yadagiri S/o Late N. nammaiah E. No. 84649, R/o 8-3-228/247, jawaharnagar, Yusuf Guda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 APSRTC, rep by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC., Bus Depot, Yadagirigutta, Nalgonda District .....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 issue an appropriate Writ or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents' corporation in not arranging the gratuity for out of service for total period of more than 27 years of service as arbitrary, unjust in violation of Art. 14 16 7 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents corporation to arrange the gratuity for the remaining period of 11 years in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.NARASIMHA GOUD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not arranging the gratuity for the period the petitioner was out of employment on his retirement, as arbitrary and illegal. It appears that the petitioner while working as Conductor was removed from service. Therefore, he raised a dispute under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes, Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act) in I.D.No.218 of 1994, dated 26th November, 2007 before the labour Court-III, Hyderabad. The Labour Court after an elaborate consideration of the entire material placed before it, came to the conclusion that the punishment of removal from service is shockingly disproportionate to that of the misconduct alleged, set aside the removal order and directed the respondent-Management to reinstate the workman into service without continuity of service, attendant benefits and back wages. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner carried the matter in WP No.4903 of 1999 and the same was allowed on 4th October, 2005 holding that the petitioner workman was also entitled for continuity of service along with all attendant benefits. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that though he is entitled for gratuity and other benefits as per the award passed by the Labour Court as modified in WP No.4903 of 1999, 4th October, 2005, the respondent- Management had not treated his service with continuity of service for about 11 years i.e., from 23.2.1982 to 8.6.1998, and denied the said period for the purpose of payment of gratuity amount. This appears to be unreasonable. Once the award passed in I.D.No.218 of 1994 dated 26.11.1997 on the file of the Labour Court-III was modified and further relief of continuity of service and other benefits was granted, the petitioner is automatically entitled for computation of the said period i.e., from the date of termination of the service on 23.2.1982 to 8.6.1998 the date of reinstatement, for the purpose of gratuity and other benefits. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to compute the said period from 23.2.1982 to 8.6.1998 for the purpose of payment of gratuity and other benefits. The respondents shall complete this exercise within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________ 22-2.2008 rkk .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}