THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No. 22283 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was engaged as driver by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation on contract basis on 25.06.2006. Alleging some acts of misconduct, the respondents initiated disciplinary proceedings against him and terminated his services through order dated 28.08.2009. In an appeal preferred by the petitioner before the first respondent an order dated 10.11.2009 was passed setting aside the order of termination and directing reengagement of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the past service is not being counted for the purpose of regularisation of service and there is no justification for the respondents for such a course of action. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is no doubt true that the second respondent conducted domestic enquiry before terminating the services of the petitioner. The fact, however, remains that the first respondent interfered with the order of termination and directed reengagement of the petitioner through order dated 10.11.2009. There is nothing to suggest in the said order that the appointment of the petitioner shall be treated as fresh one. As a matter of fact the training which is required for engaging drivers on contract basis is dispensed with by observing that he has already undergone such training. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall extend the benefit of counting of past service for the purpose of regularisation of service and not for any other monetary benefit. There shall be no order as to costs. L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt.08.08.2011 lvl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No. 22283 of 2011 Dt.08.08.2011