THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.2929 OF 2004 DATED 13TH NOVEMBER, 2009 BETWEEN The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. And another … Petitioners and The Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ananthapur, rep. by its Presiding Officer. And another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.2929 OF 2004 ORDER: The second respondent in this writ petition, a former Driver in the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for brevity, ‘the APSRTC’), approached the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Anantapur, by way of I.D.No.97 of 2000 aggrieved by his removal from service under the proceedings of the APSRTC dated 15.01.1998. The Labour Court, by its Award dated 15.05.2003, allowed the said I.D. and directed the APSRTC to appoint the petitioner afresh as a Driver on production of a genuine driving licence. Aggrieved thereby, the APSRTC filed the present writ petition. A reading of the Award under challenge discloses that the second respondent was issued charge sheet dated 03.12.1997 alleging that he had submitted a fake driving licence at the time of his selection. Thereafter, upon considering his explanation, the APSRTC resorted to the procedure of directly issuing a Show Cause Notice to the second respondent proposing his removal from service. The second respondent submitted his explanation thereto. Thereupon, the APSRTC passed the order dated 15.01.1998 removing the second respondent from service. Seized of the above facts, the Labour Court found fault with the procedure followed by the APSRTC in as much as no regular enquiry was conducted to ascertain the truth of the charges levelled against the second respondent. However, taking note of the fact that the second respondent had not produced a valid driving licence and also the scheme introduced by the APSRTC whereby an opportunity was given to the Drivers who had earlier produced fake driving licences, the Labour Court directed the APSRTC to appoint the petitioner afresh as a Driver upon production of a valid driving licence. It is stated that pursuant to the said direction, the second respondent has been duly appointed, upon production of a valid and genuine driving licence. In the absence of a regular enquiry to verify the truth of the allegations levelled against the second respondent, the procedure adopted by the APSRTC was irregular and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Further, as recognized by the Labour Court, the APSRTC itself adopted a scheme whereby Drivers, who had earlier produced fake driving licences, were given an opportunity of rectifying such lapse. In view of these facts and circumstances, there is no illegality or irregularity in the Award passed by the Labour Court directing fresh appointment of the second respondent as a Driver upon production of a valid driving licence. I therefore see no reason to interfere with the Award under challenge. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 13th November, 2009. VGSR