HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20221 OF 2010 ORDER: Petitioner was engaged as Driver, on casual basis, on 06-06- 2000 in the APSRTC and was posted in the Nellore Depot. He was issued a show cause notice dated 13-01-2004 seeking explanation, as to why his name be not deleted from the list of approved drivers. Petitioner submitted his explanation and his name was removed through order, dated 05-02-2004. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Divisional Manager, Nellore. The appeal was rejected on 09-05-2005 on the ground that it was barred by limitation. Review filed before the Regional Manager was rejected on 26-03-2007 by stating that there is no provision against the order, directing deletion of name from the list of approved drivers. Hence, this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Petitioner, no doubt, did not file the copy of the order of removal. However, from the record, it is evident that the respondents did not conduct domestic enquiry before deleting his name. Though the expression appears to be innocuous, deletion of name of a casual driver is equivalent to removal from service. This Court held in several cases that even to terminate the services of a casual or contractual employee, the procedure prescribed under the regulations, must be followed. Petitioner further states that he has been acquitted in the case, tried for the offence under Section 304-A IPC. This Court is of the view that reinstatement of the petitioner into service as in the same capacity with continuity of service, but without any benefit of the back wages, would meet the ends of justice. 4. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the order of removal, dated 05-02-2004, passed against the petitioner, is set aside. The respondents shall reinstate the petitioner into service in the same capacity. Petitioner shall be entitled to count the service between the date of removal and the date of reinstatement, only for the purpose of calculating retirement benefits and he shall be not entitled for any monetary benefits. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J December 10, 2010. KTL