IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33519 of 2011 Between: B.V.B.Reddy … Petitioner and The Regional Manager, APSRTC., Secunderabad Region, and another. … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33519 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as contract Driver on 05.04.2006 and later on vide proceedings dated 06.09.2008 he was terminated from service on the ground of operational irregularity. No enquiry was conducted before passing the order of termination. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal that was rejected on 09.03.2009 and filed review petition that was also rejected on 02.12.2011. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed a copy of the order dated 15.09.2011 passed by this Court in W.P. No.23103 of 2011 and submitted that this matter is squarely covered by the order passed in the said writ petition. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for the respondents does not dispute the same. From a perusal of the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.23103 of 2011, this Court passed the following order, which reads as under: “Though the engagement of the petitioner was on contractual basis, the Corporation was under obligation to follow the procedure prescribed under the Regulations for disciplinary matters. Neither any show cause notice was issued, nor any domestic enquiry was directed. The order suffers from vice of violation of principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of prescribed procedure. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed, and the impugned order is set aside. The respondents shall reinstate the petitioner into service with immediate effect. The petitioner, however, shall not be entitled to any back wages, or other monetary benefits, on account of this order, and it shall be open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary action, in accordance with law, if they so intend. There shall be no order as to costs.” As there is no dispute that this matter is squarely covered by the said order, following the same, this writ petition is allowed, and the impugned order dated 06.09.2008 is set aside. The respondents shall reinstate the petitioner into service with immediate effect. The petitioner, however, shall not be entitled to any back wages, or other monetary benefits, on account of this order, and it shall be open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary action, in accordance with law, if they so intend. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 20.12.2011 LSK