THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.2685 OF 2007 DT.24.09.2010 Between: N.Anand ……….Petitioner Vs. The Depot Manager, APSRTC., Anantapur Depot and two others ……….Respondents. O R D E R: The petitioner an Electrician in the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (A.P.S.R.T.C.), assails the proceedings dated 02.06.2005 passed by the Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Anantapur Region in exercise of review jurisdiction, whereby the petitioner was directed to be reinstated afresh into service as an Electrician. The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of continuity of service and other attendant benefits occasioned by the said order. Sri S.D.Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the order dated 13.06.2007 of a learned Judge of this Court in W.P.No.11039 of 1998. A copy of the said order is placed before me, which reflects that the learned Judge was dealing with a similar fact situation where the reviewing authority had modified the punishment by directing appointment of the employee afresh. The learned Judge, relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS. T.J.PAUL[1], held that once the regulations of the A.P.S.R.T.C., did not provide for such reduced punishment of appointment afresh, the order of the reviewing authority could not be sustained. Holding so, the learned Judge remanded the matter to the reviewing authority for re-consideration on the question of penalty. The case on hand is identical in nature and I am in respectful agreement with the view taken by the learned Judge. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of setting aside the proceedings dated 02.06.2005 passed by the Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Anantapur Region, respondent No.3, and remanding the matter to respondent No.3 for examining the records and determining the appropriate punishment afresh in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As the petitioner is continuing in service pursuant to the earlier order of the reviewing authority, status quo as obtaining today shall be maintained till final orders are passed by respondent No.3 in accordance with the aforestated direction. No costs. ________________ SANJAY KUMAR J., Dt.24.09.2010 Note: C.C.by 27.09.2010 B/o tjs [1] ) AIR 1999 SC 1994