HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3701 of 2010 Dated: 10-03-2010 Between: Md. Sujauddin. … Petitioner And The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Secunderabad Region & another. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3701 of 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri P.Venkateshwer Rao, and Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner, a Driver working in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not extending the benefit of Special Grade/Stagnation increment extended to the employees of the Corporation, vide Circular No.PD-65/1989, dated 03.06.1989. 3. By the aforesaid Circular, the Corporation has extended the benefit of granting Special Grade/Stagnation increment to certain categories of employees, who have put in 12 or more years of service in the same category. The petitioner herein was appointed as a Driver on 1st of August 1995, and as a disciplinary measure, he was removed from service on 05.05.2001. After exhausting the departmental remedies, he has questioned the order of removal by way of petition under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, by Award, dated 19th October 2005, passed in I.D.No.157 of 2004, set aside the order of removal with a direction to the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service without back-wages, but with continuity of service and with all other notional attendant benefits. 4. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that as much as the said Award of the Tribunal, extending the benefit of all notional attendant benefits during the period of absence has become final, the petitioner is entitled for Special Grade/Stagnation increment in terms of Circular instructions issued in Circular No.PD-65/1989, dated 03.06.1989, as clarified by further Circular No.PD-30/2005, dated 04.06.2005. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner has also submitted a representation, dated 04.11.2009, to the 2nd respondent, seeking to extend the Special Grade/Stagnation increment, but so far, no action has been taken on such representation. 5. A perusal of the Award passed by the Tribunal shows that while ordering for reinstatement of petitioner into service, he is given the benefit of continuity of service and all other notional attendant benefits. In view of extension of all notional and attendant benefits by the Tribunal, whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of Special Grade/Stagnation increment, is to be considered by the respondents. As much as no decision has been taken by the 2nd respondent on the representation of the petitioner, dated 04.11.2009, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the 2nd respondent within a period of three weeks from today, by enclosing the copy of the Award passed by the Tribunal in I.D.No.157 of 2004, for extension of benefit of Special Grade/Stagnation increment in terms of Circular No. PD-65/1989, dated 03.06.1989, as clarified by Circular No. PD- 30/2005, dated 04.06.2005. If any such representation is filed within the time stipulated, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the claim of petitioner for extension of Special Grade/Stagnation increment, and take appropriate decision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of petitioner’s representation and communicate such decision to the petitioner. 6. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 10th March 2010 ajr