IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19753 of 2000 Between: V.P. Chari, S/o. Pullaiah, APSRTC ,Warangal Depot-I Warangal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep.by it's Managing Director, Musheerabad , Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, APSRTC,Warngal Region, 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC,Warngal-1 Depoet. .....RESPONDENTS 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, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of ADC/Controller with eﬀect from the date on which the junior to the petitioner were promoted duly taking his seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e.1.7.1975 with all consequential and other attendant benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner :MR.V.VISWANATHAM Counsel for the Respondents : SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No : 19753 of 2000 ORDER : The petitioner is a Conductor working in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), and is attached to Warangal–I Depot. In this writ petition, he seeks directions by way of Mandamus to promote him to the post of ADC/Controller with eﬀect from the date on which his juniors were promoted, by duly taking his seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 01.07.1975. 2. In the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner was appointed as a Conductor on 01.07.1975 at Hanamkonda Depot, but however, he was removed from service on 05.06.1987, and the same was questioned by raising an industrial dispute in I.D.No.672 of 1987 before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal. The Tribunal, by an award dated 09.02.1989, has declared the order of removal as illegal and ordered for reinstatement of petitioner with full backwages. The said award was questioned by the Corporation in writ petition No.10640 of 1989, and the said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 09.04.1993, modifying the quantum of backwages to 50%. Then the matter was carried in appeal by the Corporation by ﬁling Writ Appeal No.1110 of 1993. The said writ appeal was dismissed by a judgment dated, 13.10.1993, conﬁrming the ﬁndings recorded in writ petition No.10640 of 1989. Now, it is the case of the petitioner that as he was initially appointed on 01.07.1975, he is entitled to the beneﬁt of seniority from the date of his initial appointment. It is his grievance that inspite of his juniors being promoted to the post of ADC/Controller, which is the next higher post, he was deprived of such promotion illegally. 3. Counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the respondents, wherein while admitting that the petitioner was appointed on 01.07.1975, it is stated that he was removed from service on three earlier occasions, but however, he was again appointed as the competent appellate authority has considered his case and ordered for his appointment as a fresh candidate. It is stated that in view of the orders passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner was appointed as a fresh candidate on 13.11.1981. Thereafter, he was removed from service again on 19.06.1986. The said order of removal was challenged by the petitioner before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, by ﬁling I.D.No.672 of 1987. The Tribunal, by its award dated 09.02.1989, has set aside the said order of removal and ordered for reinstatement of petitioner with full backwages. But, however, when the Corporation has ﬁled writ petition No.10640 of 1989, this Court has modiﬁed the award and ordered for payment of backwages to the extent of 50% only. 4. Though the higher post to that of the post of Conductor is ADC/Controller, which is the promotion post, in view of the earlier orders of removal, the petitioner cannot seek any directions for promotion to the said post by taking his seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 01.07.1975. Even prior to the order of removal on 4th occasion i.e. on 19.06.1986, it is evident from the counter aﬃdavit that he had already suﬀered the orders of removal on three occasions. But however, he was appointed as a fresh candidate in view of the orders of the appellate authority in the departmental appeal and he was appointed as a fresh conductor on 13.11.1981. When he was appointed on 13.11.1981 pursuant to an order of the appellate authority as a fresh conductor, the petitioner is not entitled to seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e. from 01.07.1975. As much as the earlier orders of removal were not set aside, there was a break in the service of the petitioner. Since the appellate authority has ordered for reinstatement of petitioner only as a fresh candidate, he is not entitled for seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e. from 01.07.1975. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not ﬁnd any merit in this writ petition for grant of directions to reckon the seniority of the petitioner from 01.07.1975 and to promote him to the post of ADC/Controller on the ground that his juniors were considered for such promotion. As much as the petitioner was removed from service and was subsequently appointed as a fresh candidate on 13.11.1981, the juniors to him, who are originally on rolls pursuant to appointment on 01.07.1975, cannot be termed as his juniors. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not ﬁnd any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 3rd November 2008 ajr