IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1332 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12/08/2008 in WP NO : 17445 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: P.Ramesh, S/o. Lakshminarayana, R/o. Registrar Office Bazar, Vuyyur, Krishna District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The APSRTC, Rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The APSRTC, Rep. by its Regional Manager, Krishna Region, At Vijayawada. 3 The APSRTC, Rep. by its Depot Manager, Vijayawada Depot, Krishna District. 4 The Industrial Tribunal-Labour Court, Rep. by its Chairman- cum-Presiding Officer, Guntur. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.CHALLASIVASANKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by an order dated 12-8-2008 passed in W.P.No. 17445 of 2008, this appeal has been ﬁled by a driver of the respondents-Corporation. While driving the bus, the appellant-driver caused an accident, which resulted into death of three persons. Regular enquiry was held by the respondents-Corporation and as a result thereof the appellant was removed from service. The order of removal was conﬁrmed in the appeal and thereafter the appellant had approached the Labour Court. The Labour Court set aside the order of removal and ordered reinstatement but without back wages. The appellant had challenged non- payment of back wages by ﬁling the aforestated writ petition, which has been rejected. We have heard the learned Advocates and have carefully gone through the award as well as the order passed in the writ petition. Upon perusal of the aforestated order and upon hearing the learned Advocates, in our opinion, it cannot be said that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge was either unjust or improper. Suﬃcient reasons have been recorded by the Labour Court for non-payment of back wages. Judgments delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court have been duly considered and the principle of ‘no work no pay’ has also been taken into account. It is not the case of the appellant that he had led any evidence to the eﬀect that he had not worked anywhere during the period when he was out of service. For the aforestated reasons, we do not see any substance in the appeal and, therefore, the appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. _____________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ _________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 18th October, 2008. GRR