IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 26245 of 2008 Between: P. Gangadhar (E.No. 073055) S/o. Late P. Gangaram Narayankhed Depot, APSRTC, Sanga Reddy Region, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P. State Road Transport Corporation Rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Narayankhed, Sanga Reddy District, Medak. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 or order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus i.e declare the action of the respondents in not protecting petitioner's seniority and pay, duly granting notional increments, keeping the awards passed in ID No. 164 of 2000 dt. 6-3- 2003 and award passed in ID No. 52 of 2005 dt. 14-12-2006 on the file of Hon'ble Labour Court-II, Hyderabad as illegal, and arbitrary ii. Consequently direct the respondents to reckon petitioner's seniority w.e.f. 11-1-1993 duly protecting his pay by granting notional increments pursuant to the award passed in ID No. 164 of 2000 dt. 6-3-2003 and award passed in ID No. 52 of 2005 dt. 14-12-2006 on the file of Hon'ble Labour Court, II, Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not protecting the petitioner’s seniority and pay, duly granting notional increments, in terms of the awards passed in IA.NO.164 of 2000, dated 6.3.2003 and award passed in I.D.No.52 of 2005, dated 14.12.2006 on the file of the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, and for a consequential direction to the respondents to reckon the petitioner’s seniority with effect from 11.1.1993 duly protecting his pay by granting notional increments. The petitioner asserts that while he was working as Conductor at Narayankhed Depot, the 2nd respondent by his order, dated 23.10.2000 removed him from service. When the petitioner filed I.D.No.164 of 2000 against his removal from service, the Labour Court, Hyderabad set aside the order of removal and directed reinstatement of the petitioner into service without back wages, but with continuity of service and notional increments and all other attendant benefits giving liberty to 2nd respondent herein to stop two annual increments of the petitioner with cumulative effect as a matter of punishment. In pursuance of the Award dated 6.3.2003, the petitioner was reinstated into to service duly granting all the notional increments. While so, he was issued charge sheet on the allegation that he committed some irregularity in his duty as Conductor. He submitted explanation to the charge. Based on the enquiry conducted, he was removed from service with effect from 26.11.2004. Aggrieved by it, he filed I.D.No.52 of 2005 and the Labour Court by an award dated 14.12.2006 directed the 2nd respondent to reinstate him into service with continuity of service, but without back wages and attendant benefits. In pursuance of the award dated 14.12.2006, he was reinstated into service. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that though he requested the 2nd respondent to implement the award on several occasions, he has not fixed his seniority and pay nor released annual grade increments. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Admittedly, the petitioner is seeking implementation of the awards passed by the Labour Court. If the respondents have not implemented the award and granted the benefits, which he was directed to be granted thereunder, the remedy of the petitioner is to move the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, which passed the award, seeking its execution. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, for execution of the awards. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 17th December, 2008 bcj _____________ N.V.RAMANA, J 17th December, 2008 bcj