HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.674 of 2006 ORDER: (per Honourable Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) The appellant-A.P. State Road Transport Corporation filed the Writ Appeal aggrieved against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.19750 of 1999, dated 02.08.2005, setting aside the award of the Labour Court, Warangal, in I.D.No.153 of 1991, dated 12.01.1994, and directed to reinstate the first respondent into service as a fresh Conductor. Facts, in brief, are that the first respondent was appointed as a Conductor in the appellant-Corporation in the year 1988. While he was conducting the bus bearing No. AAZ 5495 on 04.07.1990 on the route Bhadrachalam to Amalgudem, a check was exercised at 19.30 hours at stage No.7/8, wherein the checking officials found certain irregularities and issued charge sheet for the following charges: 1. For having violated rule ‘issue and star’ which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28(xxxii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 2. For having failed to issue tickets to a batch of four passengers, who boarded your bus at Lakshmipuram stage No.6 and alighting at Mariagudem stage No.7/8 without tickets even though you have collected the requisite fare of Rs.1.50 each (total six rupees) from a batch of four passengers as above which constitutes misconduct U/R 28(vi)(a) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 3. For having closed the S.R. upto stage No.7 without issue of tickets to the above said passengers, which constitutes misconduct U/R Reg.28(xxxii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. An enquiry was conducted and the enquiry officer submitted his report holding the first respondent guilty of the charges. The disciplinary authority, having accepted the report of the Enquiry Officer, removed the first respondent from service by proceedings dated 23.02.1991. The appeal preferred by the first respondent to the appellate authority was also rejected. Hence, he raised a dispute under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’) and the same was taken on file as I.D.No.153 of 1991 by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal. By order dated 12.01.1994, the Labour Court dismissed the dispute and confirmed the order of removal passed by the Corporation. The learned Single Judge, while taking into account the various submissions made across the bar, though agreed with the finding of guilt, observed that since there was no past misconduct, removal from service was disproportionate to the gravity of the charges levelled and directed to reinstate the first respondent as a fresh Conductor. Having heard the counsel and having perused the material available on record, it is not the case of the appellant-Corporation that there was past misconduct of the first respondent nor any specific grounds were raised in the Writ Appeal. Having regard to the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge in directing to reinstate the first respondent afresh as a Conductor, we do not find any merits in the appeal. The Writ Appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. B.PRAKASH RAO,J G. BHAVANI PRASAD,J Date:17.08.2010 usd