IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2325 of 2009 Between: K.Kodanda, S/o.Shulana, APSRTC, Midhani bus Depot, Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dy.Chief Personnel Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Zone, JBS, Picket, Secunderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Midhani bus Depot, Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 counting the leave without pay period 29-11-1986 to 31.01.1988 (i.e., from the date of suspension to date of reinstatement) for the seniority in the post of conductor is bad, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and unreasonable by setting aside the letter No.E2/752(2)/08-HCZ, dated 10-11-2008 of the 1st respondent herein and consequently direct the respondents to count the said period 29-11-1986 to 31-01-1988 (i.e., from the date of suspension to date of reinstatement) for the seniority by placing the petitioner at appropriate place in the qualified candidates list of conductors to effect promotions as Junior Assistants to the petitioners herein. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to amend the cause title. Permission as sought for is accorded. The petitioner is a Conductor in Midhani Bus Depot of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. He came to be removed from service on the ground of certain cash and ticket irregularities. He filed an appeal and the same is ended in dismissal. Thereafter, he filed review petition before the Regional Manager, Bhagyanagar, presently re-designated as Hyderabad City Region. The Regional Manager ordered for reinstatement of the petitioner while treating the period of absence from the date of suspension till he reported to duty as leave without pay. For better appreciation, I may refer to the order passed by the Regional Manager on the review petition, which reads as hereunder: “The Depot Manager, Mehidipatnam after following the procedure laid down under Regulation 12 of APSRTC Employees’ (CC&A) Regulations, 1967 had imposed the penalty of removal on the petitioner considering the gravity of the offences committed by him. Hence the present review petition. I have perused the Review Petition along with relevant records. It is an admitted fact that the passengers have paid the fare and even though the bus had traveled for sufficient distance from St.Anns School to V.N.Colony the conductor did not issue the ticket. The failure has been established beyond reasonable doubt and the intentions have been clearly put forth. The removal thus ordered is just and proper. The only point in favour of the petitioner is his very short service in the Corporation. I am therefore inclined to take a lenient view and order that the petitioner be reinstated into service. ON reinstatement his seniority may be regulated as if he is appointed afresh. He shall make a fresh Security Deposit of Rs.400.00. The period of absence from the date of suspension till he reports for duty be treated as Leave Without Pay. He shall report to the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager (HD), Dilsukhnagar for further posting orders.” He reported to duty on 28.1.1988. Thereafter, he submitted a representation for removal of anomaly that had crept in the proceedings dated 21.1.1988 of the Regional Manager, Bhagya Nagar Region and requested to rectify the anomaly. The Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, Hyderabad considered the representation and proceeded to clarify that there is no anomaly in the order of the Regional Manager, Bhagyanagar dated 21.1.1988. The proceedings issued by the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, Hyderabad City Region dated 10.11.2008 are under challenge in this writ petition. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned standing counsel for APSRTC takes notice on behalf of the respondents. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that once the absence of the petitioner from the date of suspension to the date of reinstatement treated as leave without pay, his seniority in the cadre of Conductor is to be maintained. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the order of the revisional authority is to the effect that the appointment of the petitioner afresh and therefore, his seniority counts from the date of his appointment afresh. I have gone through the order passed by the Regional Manager, Bhagyanagar Region on the review petition filed by the petitioner. It is explicit from the order that the period of absence from the date of suspension to the date of reinstatement has been treated as leave without pay in which case the absence period does not have effect on his original seniority. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to retain the original seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Conductor in Hyderabad City Region. __________ 04-03-2009 rkk