HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.11400 of 2011 Date: April 21, 2011 Between: Y.Prabhakar Reddy … Petitioner And 1. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Charminar Division, Hyderabad and others … Respondent This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.11400 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner as contract Driver, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the 1st respondent to re-instate the petitioner into service with continuity of service with all consequential service benefits such as regularisation etc., 2. The writ petitioner has been appointed in the year 2007 as a Contract Driver in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) in Hyderabad City region. While he was performing his duties as such in the Corporation, his services were terminated by the 2nd respondent-Depot Manager, by office order No.01/2(16)/07-H-II, dated 22.10.2007, on the allegation of involvement in an accident of dashing a motorcyclist near Nampally. It is the grievance of the petitioner that no enquiry was conducted and no opportunity was given to the petitioner to put forth his case. Hence, the writ petition. 3. It is well settled that since a temporary/contract employee has no right to the post his services may be terminated in terms of his appointment. Where, however, the temporary employee succeeds in establishing that the termination was arbitrary having no nexus with unsuitability or by way of punishment then the Court will intervene and set aside the termination if the same was done without complying with the principles of natural justice. 3. In the similar facts and circumstances, this Court by order, dated 07.12.2010, in W.P.No.30611 of 2010, allowed the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with immediate effect; that the petitioner, however, shall not be entitled to any back wages, or other monetary benefits, on account of that order; and that it shall be open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary action in accordance with law, if they so intend. 4. Following the same, this Writ Petition is allowed in terms thereof. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C. BHANU, J April 21, 2011. LMV