THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.3082 of 2005 Dated: 07.04.2010 Between: M. Govardhan. .. Petitioner. And A.P.S.R.T.C. rep. by its Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, and another. .. Respondents. ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. It appears, the petitioner-workman, who was appointed as Conductor in A.P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) in the year 1992, was imposed with a punishment of removal from service, for certain cash and ticket irregularities alleged to have been committed by him, by order dated 08.08.1997. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner raised a dispute in I.D.No.57 of 2001, under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’), before the Industrial Tribunal-I, Hyderabad, against the management- 2nd respondent herein, and the Tribunal, by award dated 16.04.2002, modified the punishment of removal to that of stoppage of one annual grade increment, without cumulative effect, and directed the management to reinstate the workman into service, but without backwages. It was also ordered to treat the period from the date of suspension of the workman till his reinstatement as on duty without monetary benefits. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was reinstated into service on 23.08.2002 and is presently working at Tandur Depot. It is the case of the petitioner that while he was out of employment, his wife underwent family planning operation on 07.06.1999 in Upponunthala Government Hospital, and the same has been certified by the Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre of Uppununthala, Mahabubnagar District, by issuing certificate dated 11.06.1999. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he submitted a representation to the Corporation, for grant of family planning incentive with effect from 11.06.1999, till date the authorities failed to act upon it. Hence, this writ petition. In the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, the respondents are directed to consider the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition as a representation of the petitioner, for grant of family incentive increment, and pass appropriate orders, as per his eligibility in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that the claim of the petitioner shall not be rejected on the ground of laches in submitting the certificate, dated 11.06.1999, as he was out of employment during the relevant period and thereafter reinstated into service in pursuance of the award dated 16.04.2002 passed by the Labour Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 07.04.2010 v v