IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4318 of 2007 Between: The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., B.Kothakota, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 C.Sambaiah, E.111101, S/o.C.Siddaiah, Suraiahgaripalli (post), Somala (Mandal) Chittoor District. 2 The Hon'ble Labour Court, Anantapur. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to please be call for the records relating to I.D.No.396/2002 on the file of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur and quash the award dated 27.7.2006 by issuing appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4318 of 2007 ORDER: The 1st respondent was employed as a Conductor in A.P.S.R.T.C. in the year 1984. When he was conducting a bus on the route from B.Kothakota to Chalimamidi, a check was caused and it was found that he had utilized nine tickets, which were already issued to the passengers in the previous trip, and collected Rs.36/- from nine passengers. The relevant charges, as regards the said irregularity, were framed and after conducting the domestic enquiry, the petitioner removed the 1st respondent from service, through order, dated 16.07.2001. The remedies of appeal and review availed by the 1st respondent were not successful. Therefore, he approached the Labour Court, Anantapur by filing I.D.No.396 of 2002. Through its award, dated 27.07.2006, the Labour Court had set aside the order of removal and directed reinstatement of the 1st respondent with continuity of service and attendant benefits, but without back wages. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. One important aspect, which needs to be noticed, at the threshold, is that the 1st respondent attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2006. Though the award was passed in the I.D. on 27.07.2006, directing reinstatement of the 1st respondent, he could not reap the benefits of the award, on account of the fact that shortly thereafter, he attained the age of superannuation. The petitioner assails the very award passed by the Labour Court and in particular, the findings on the charges leveled against the 1st respondent. This Court is of the view that the Labour Court had undertaken extensive discussion and arrived at a proper conclusion about the proof of the charges leveled against the 1st respondent. At any rate, it is not under obligation to reinstate the 1st respondent. At the most, it may have to treat the period up to the date of superannuation, as holding good, for calculating the terminal benefits. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the award passed by the Labour Court, Anantapur in I.D.No.396 of 2002 shall stand modified to the effect that the 1st respondent shall be entitled for the benefit of continuity of service from the date of removal till the date of his attaining superannuation and not for any other benefits. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 01.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4318 of 2007 Date: 01.04.2008 JSU