IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 27591 of 2008 Between: Qamarunnisa, W/o. Late Md. Rahamat Ali, R/o. H.No. 18-12-418/C/36, Opp : Paragaon Printers, Kanchanbagh, Hafeezbabanagar, Chandrayagutta, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Region, MGBS Complex, Gowliguda, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, HCU Bus Depot, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. .....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 issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in not paying the gratuity amount to the petitioner for her husband's out of employment period (i.e. 06-02-1993 to 09-7-2002) in concerned with her husband's removal as illegal, bad, arbitrary and contrary to the judgements of this Hon'ble Court and consequently direct the respondents to pay the gratuity with interest for the said period to the petitioner Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER: Seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the gratuity amount of the petitioner’s husband for the period from 6.2.1993 to 9.7.1002 i.e. from the date of removal to the date of reinstatement as arbitrary and illegal, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner is a widow of the deceased Md.Rahamat Ali who was appointed on 20.12.1986 as a driver in the respondent – A.P.State Road Transport Corporation. Initially, he was suspended on the charge of rash and negligence driving on 6.2.1993 and subsequently he was removed from service. Questioning the same, he approached the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad. The Labour Court by its award in ID No.194 of 1999 dated 1.4.2002 directed his reinstatement into service with continuity of service and all attendant benefits. Thereafter, he was reinstated and subsequently died on 1.12.2007 while in service. Thereafter, she made an application to the respondents seeking payment of the service benefits and the respondents have paid certain amounts to her. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the Labour Court has awarded continuity of service, the respondents are not paying the gratuity for the period her husband was out of employment. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court reported in M.Rama Rao v. Assistant Traffic Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad [1] wherein this Court held that in a case where under Section 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Labour Court has set aside the order of removal of an employee and directed that the employee be reinstated into service with continuity of service, the management could not deny the payment of gratuity to the employee on his retirement for the period during which he was out of employment as a result of the order of removal. In the light of the judgment of this Court referred above and in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for both the parties that the above said judgment governs the case, the writ petition is allowed in terms thereof and the respondents are directed to extend the monetary benefits viz., gratuity etc., to the petitioner who is the widow of the deceased employee for the period during which her husband was out of employment viz., from 06.2.1993 to 9.7.2002. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.31.12.2008 msv [1] 1998(3) ALD 76