THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 13739 of 2010 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not paying the gratuity amount for the total service rendered by the petitioner’s father (i.e. 28 years) to the petitioner as arbitrary and illegal; consequently, to direct the respondents to pay the gratuity for the balance service period of seven years of the petitioner’s father to the petitioner with interest. It appears, the father of the petitioner, having served 28 long years continuously as Driver in APSRTC, on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from service. The grievance of the petitioner is that his father was entitled for gratuity for a period of 28 years, whereas, the respondents have paid gratuity only for 21 years. When petitioner approached 2nd respondent to pay the gratuity for the remaining seven years, 2nd respondent replied that the absenteeism and sick period of his father in his entire service was not counted for the purpose of gratuity, which has come to seven years. There is no necessity of going into all the details. This aspect has already been examined by the APSRTC and it has issued Circular No.PD-28/2009 dated 29.9.2009 wherein it is stated that a Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos. 16967 and 19964 of 1989 held that merely penalizing the employees for few days of absenteeism does not take away the case of the employees from the expression ‘continuous service’. Therefore, the employees should be treated as in continuous service within the meaning of Sec. 2A(1) and the question of counting 240 days of actual working in that particular year as per Sec.2-A(2) does not arise. Thus, the APSRTC directed the Unit Officers to follow the guidelines, which read as under: “1. The provisions of Sec.2-A of “The Payment of Gratuity Act 1972” while computing the total service rendered by an employee for payment of gratuity; ignoring the instructions issued vide para-3(i) and (iv) on Gratuity through Circular No.PD-114/94 dated 20.10.1994; and 2. To reckon the services relating to removal period whenever the continuity of service is granted in favour of the employees by the Courts”. Under those circumstances, the respondents are directed to examine the case and pass appropriate orders, as per law, keeping in view the above guidelines, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and communicate the same to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 18-6-2010. MVB.