THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.30425 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the third respondent in terminating the petitioner from service on the allegation of unauthorized absence without holding any enquiry and by attached stigma vide proceedings No.M2/1(9)2008-AMP dated 16.05.2008 as arbitrary and contrary to APSRTC regulations and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner by suspending the said proceedings. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as driver on contract basis on 11.02.2008 and while working at Amalapuram Depot, he absented duties from 25.04.2008 to 15.05.2008 without any intimation or prior sanction of leave. Without holding any enquiry, the third respondent passed order dated 16.05.2008 terminating the services of the petitioner. The absence of the petitioner to duties during the above said period is due to the accident met by him resulting in fracture of the leg and undergoing major surgery at a private hospital at Rajahmundry. The petitioner further alleges that the said incident was also informed to the Depot Manager by duly submitting Medical Certificates but the Depot Manager refused to receive the same and passed the termination order without holding any enquiry or providing any opportunity to him. Hence, the Writ Petition. Heard both the sides. In similar circumstances, entertaining W.P.No.5998 of 2009, W.P.No.23764 of 2010 and so many other cases, this Court has been making it clear that the Depot Managers are not liable to impose major punishments, orders of termination or disengagement of the services of the contract drivers, without following the due procedure. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is allowed right at this stage instead of unproductively keeping it pending on the file of this Court. The impugned order dated 16.05.2008 passed by the Deport Manager, Amalapuram, is set aside and the petitioner be re-engaged as a contract driver. He will be entitled to reckon the previous service rendered by him prior to 16.05.2008 to the Corporation for such benefits as for regularization, terminal benefits etc., but however, the writ petitioner will not be entitled to any monetary benefit arising from out of the setting aside the proceedings dated 16.05.2008. No costs. _________________ (G.CHANDRAIAH, J) 17th November 2011 RRB