HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.6265 of 2011 Dated: 25.03.2011 Between: B.PRAKASH. ..... PETITIONER AND THE REGIONAL MANAGER, APSRTC & ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.6265 OF 2011 ORDER: The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not ordering re engagement with continuity of service of the petitioner as contract conductor as bad, arbitrary, illegal and principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondents to treat the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 6.6.2009 as that of the reinstatement of the petitioner as conductor with continuity of service, attendant benefits with all consequential service benefits including regularization. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as contract conductor on 10.8.2008 and while he was performing the duties, he was terminated from service by proceedings No:PA/95 (1)/2009-MP, dated 24.1.2009 on certain allegations. Aggrieved by the same, he filed an appeal to the Divisional Manger, Charminar Division and the same was rejected on 25.5.2009. Aggrieved by the same, he also filed a review petition before the Regional Manager, Hyderabad-1st respondent and while setting side the order of termination, the 1st respondent issued proceedings, dated 6.6.2009 directing the authorities to re engage him as a conductor on contract basis. Consequently, he has been reinstated into service. But, he has not been provided with continuity of service. Therefore, he filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in W.P.No:32579 of 2010, dated 24.12.2010, which was allowed as under: “Following the same, the writ petition is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of the service between the date of termination and the date of re engagement. However, the petitioner shall be entitled to any monetary benefits on account of the said benefit. No costs.” Following the same, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: “Notwithstanding the proceedings dated 6.6.2009 issued by the 1st respondent, it is directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of the service between the date of termination and the date of re engagement. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits on account of the said benefit. No costs.” _____________________ Justice G. Chandraiah Dated: 25.03.2011 NOTE CC IN 3 DAYS (BO) gurc. HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.6265 of 2011 Dated: 25.03.2011