THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 2390 OF 2011 O R D E R: This Writ Petition has been instituted seeking a writ of mandamus for declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not ordering re-engagement of the writ petitioner with continuity of service as contract driver as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri M. Kotaiah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri C. Sunil Kumar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation, who concedes that the issue raised in this Writ Petition is covered by the order dated 31.12.2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 32132 of 2010. In somewhat similar circumstances, while entertaining Writ Petition No. 32132 of 2010, a detailed order has been passed by me, directing that the petitioner shall also be entitled to the benefit of the service between the date of termination and the date of re- engagement, but however, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits on account of the said benefit. Hence, following the said ruling, directions are issued in this case also, reiterating the earlier directions given in Writ Petition No. 32132 of 2010. With this, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 7th February 2011 ksld