IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4743 of 2009 Between: K.Srinivas Reddy, S/o. Sri K.Raja Reddy, E-850935) R/o. C-906, MIG - II, N.G.O's Colony, Vanasthalipuram,. Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Andhra Pradesh State Road Trnsport Corporation, Rep by its Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, City Region, Picket, Hyderabad, 3 The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Midani Depot, Hyderabad. .....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 orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not allowing me to join duties, pursuant to the Award dated 07-07-2006 made in I.D.No.62/2006 on the file of the Hon'ble Labour Court-I, Hyderabad and insptie of letters dated 07-08-2006 and 11-07-2007 as arbitrary, illegal and against the principles of natural justice and against the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to take the petitioner into service of the Respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.GANGADHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4743 of 2009 O R D E R: The petitioner is appointed as a casual conductor in the respondents’ Corporation in the year 1999. He was charge-sheeted for his unauthorized absence. The disciplinary authority, accepting the findings recorded by the enquiry officer, issued a show cause notice to the petitioner proposing punishment of removal. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority removed the petitioner from service on 15- 12-2005. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Divisional Manager, Hyderabad Division assailing the order passed by the disciplinary authority. Since the appellate authority did not pass any order, he raised industrial dispute. While the matter was pending before the Labour Court, the Corporation and the petitioner entered into compromise whereby and whereunder, the Corporation undertook to reinstate the petitioner. Accordingly, a joint memo was filed before the Lok Adalath and in terms of the joint memo, an award was came to be passed on 07-07-2006. Despite undertaking given by the respondents before the Lok Adalath, they did not reinstate the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned standing counsel for APSRTC takes notice for the respondents. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The factual aspect of the award being passed on a joint memo filed by the parties is not disputed by the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner as per the award dated 07-07-2006 passed in I.D.No.62 of 2006 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J Date: 06-03-2009 KLP