THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 3818 of 2005 Dated: 10.06.2010 Between: The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District, and another. .. Petitioners. And Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ananthapur, rep. by its Presiding Officer, And another. .. Respondents. ORDER: This writ petition is directed against the award dated 19.06.2004 passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur, in I.D.No.298 of 2002. Petitioners are the management. Respondent No.2 is the workman. It appears, respondent No.2 was appointed as casual driver with effect from 25.06.1997 in the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation. At the time of his selection for the said post, respondent No.2 produced driving licence No.9978/87. As per the terms and conditions of appointment order, the appointment is subject to verification of driving licence and other certificates stated therein. When the driving licence furnished by respondent No.2 was sent for verification as per the terms and conditions of the appointment order, it was found to be not genuine and, therefore, the management passed orders dated 10.02.1997 terminating the services of respondent No.2. Aggrieved thereby, respondent No.2 filed I.D.No.298 of 2002, under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur. It was the case of the workman before the Labour Court that after verification of all the documents produced by him and after conducting driving test, the management selected him as driver, that he is a perfect driver and capable of driving, as he was not involved in any accident during the period of his service with the Corporation and that he obtained fresh driving licence and approached the Regional Manager, APSRTC, for consideration of his case, as per the circular issued by the Regional Manager, APSRTC, Tirupati, whereunder an opportunity was given to all the drivers, whose services were terminated on the ground of producing non-genuine driving licence, to apply with fresh driving licence. It was the case of the management that the workman has not placed even a scrap of paper to show that the driving licence produced by him at the time of selection is genuine one, that as the driving licence produced by the workman was found to be not genuine, he cannot be permitted to drive the vehicle as per Section 3 of Motor Vehicles Act, and that the termination order issued by them is justified as the selection itself is subject to the condition of verification of driving licence. Before the Labour Court, none were examined and no documents were marked on either side. The Labour Court, after considering the matter in detail, passed the impugned award directing the management to appoint the workman as driver afresh and to take into consideration the circular No.P4/684 (7)/2000 RM (A), dated 31.08.2000, issued by the Regional Manager, APSRTC, Tirupati, for the purpose of calculating the period of three years valid driving licence for giving appointment, and also the previous service rendered by the workman for the purpose of calculating 3 years valid driving licence. The Labour Court also made it clear that if the workman has not approached the Regional Manager with fresh driving licence as per the circular of the Regional Manager, he shall furnish genuine driving licence obtained subsequently within a period of one month from the date of publication of the award. Aggrieved by the award passed by the Labour Court, the manager filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned award and other material placed on record. It is not in dispute that the Regional Manager, APSRTC, has issued a circular giving an opportunity to all the drivers, whose services were terminated on the ground of producing non-genuine driving licence, to apply with fresh driving licence for consideration of their case. Apparently, the workman is stated to have obtained fresh driving licence subsequently and produced the same before the authorities for consideration of his case as per the circular issued by the Regional Manager. The workman is not involved in any accident during the period of his service. Thus, I am of the considered opinion that the Labour Court has rightly passed the impugned award as stated supra and the same needs no interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 10.06.2010 v v