HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.9789 of 2010 Date: April 27, 2010 Between: D. Prakash, S/o. late D. Purushottam, Age: 32 years, C.35384, Occ: Driver, C/o. D. Kristappa, R/o.D.No.2/716, Madina Bag, Guntakal, Anantapur District … Petitioner And The Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, and Two others … Respondents Order: In this writ petition, proceedings No.P1/1(1)/2008-RDG, dated 18-03-2008, issued by the third respondent, Depot Manager, APSRTC, Rayadurg Depot, Anantapur District, terminating the services of the petitioner herein, is questioned. The petitioner was appointed in the respondents- Corporation as Driver on contract basis on 06-06-2007 and posted at Rayadurg Depot. Though his appointment was made on contract basis, it is stated that regular selection procedure has been followed and as per the practice in vogue, employees who are appointed on contract basis are being absorbed into regular service as and when vacancies arise. On the ground that the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent to duties, his services were terminated by the impugned proceedings. It is the case of the petitioner that as his father was sick, he could not attend duties. It is stated that though he was appointed on contract basis, selections have been made by following the process contemplated for selection of candidates into regular service of the Corporation. It is stated that as much as his services are terminated, by alleging misconduct on his part, it was not open to the respondents to have done so, without conducting any enquiry and without issuing any notice to him. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that, in identical circumstances, this court, in W.P.No.5196 of 2010, set aside the order of termination of the petitioner therein, by order dated 08-03-2010. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation admitted that similar writ petitions are allowed by this court reserving liberty to the Corporation to conduct enquiry into the alleged misconduct. I have perused a copy of the impugned proceedings, whereby the services of the petitioner are terminated. The said termination not a termination simplicitor. By the impugned proceedings, misconduct is attributed to the petitioner; namely that he was absent to duties unauthorizedly. When such is the case, the respondents ought not to have terminated the services of the petitioner without conducting enquiry and putting him on notice. For the aforesaid reasons and also in view of the order dated 08-03-2010 passed by this court in W.P.No.5196 of 2010, this writ petition is allowed and proceedings No.P1/1(1)/2008- RDG, dated 18-03-2008, issued by the third respondent, Depot Manager, APSRTC, Rayadurg Depot, Anantapur District is set aside. Further, there shall be a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Driver on contract basis. It is made clear that the petitioner is entitled to all the benefits that are extended to similarly placed contract employees. However, if there is any misconduct on the part of the petitioner, this order will not preclude the respondents from taking necessary action against him in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ______________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) April 27, 2010 MRR