IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20243 of 1998 Between: The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Karimnagar Depot ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A. Anantha Reddy Deshrajpalli, Ramadugu Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. 2 The Labour Court Godavarikhani .....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue any appropriate Writ order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the award of the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal in I.D.No.13/95 dated 17.9.1997 and published on 5.11.1997 and quash the same as being illegal arbitrary and unjust and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY (SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20243 of 1998 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) It is the case of the 1st respondent that for certain irregularities said to have committed by him a departmental enquiry was conducted and punishment of removal was imposed, against which he preferred appeal and the appellate authority revised the punishment with reduction of pay from Rs.1570/- to Rs.1330/- with cumulative effect, treating the period of absence as not on duty. Questioning the said reduction of punishment, the 1st respondent raised a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Godavarikhani in I.D.No.13/2009 and the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court by award dated 17.09.1997 held that withholding of one increment without cumulative effect is sufficient and accordingly, restored the pay of Rs.1570/- and the period of absence from the date of removal to the date of duty is directed to be treated on duty, entitling him for the wages. Questioning the same this writ petition is filed. This Court while admitting the writ petition, made it clear that it is left open for the APSRTC to adjust the payment of wages which is found to be unwarranted in future pay subject to the result of the writ petition. It is stated that the 1st respondent retired from service and his terminal benefits were also settled. In view of the same we are of the opinion that no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ____________________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY,J Dated: 29.06.2009 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Labour Court Godavarikhani 2 2. 2CCs to 3. 2CD copies