IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No 9134 of 2008 Between: V.Srinivasa Rao S/o.late Ram Babu R/o.Purushothamapatnam Chilkaluripet Guntur Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Depot Manager Guntur-II Depot,Guntur Dist 2 The Regional Manager A.P.S.R.T.C Guntur Dist 3 The Presiding Officer Labour Court Guntur Dist .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the award dt.01-08-2005 in I.D No.143/2000 on the file of 3rd respondent and as notified on 10-11-2005 as per the order of Labour Employment Training and factories (Lab.I) Department in so far as it relates to rejection of the petitioner claim for reliefs of continuity of service back wages and call other attendant benefits etc by declaring the same as illegal and arbitrary under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 and consequently direct the respondent 1and 2 to grant continuity of service back wages and other attendant benefits together with interest @ 24% per annum. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.PITCHAIAH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Driver in A.P.S.R.T.C. in the year 1996. A charge sheet was issued to him alleging that he corrected the date of birth in the S.S.C. Certificate and Transfer Certificate from 15.07.1968 to 15.01.1968. The petitioner submitted his explanation and in the departmental enquiry, the charge levelled against him was held proved. On the basis of the same, the first respondent passed an order, dated 26.11.1998, removing the petitioner from service. After unsuccessfully exhausting the remedies of appeal and review, the petitioner approached the Labour Court, Guntur under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by filing I.D.No.143 of 2000. Through its award, dated 01.08.205, the Labour Court had set aside the order of removal and directed reinstatement of the petitioner. However, it denied the benefit of back wages as well as continuity of service. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This is such a case where the correction of the date of birth in the S.S.C. Certificate and Transfer Certificate was made to the detriment of the employee. The object, however, was to ensure that the petitioner is within the age of 18 years as on the date of issuance of licence. Without that correction, there existed a possibility of the very cancellation of driving licence and thereby removal of the petitioner. The Labour Court did not undertake any discussion as to the truth or otherwise of the allegation made against the petitioner. However, as the petitioner did not stand to any benefit on account of the alleged correction, it had set aside the order of removal. The denial of continuity of service would have its own impact upon the emoluments as well as terminal benefits of the petitioner. Whatever may have been the justification of the Labour Court in denying the benefit of back wages, it ought to have granted continuity of service to the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition is partly allowed, directing that in addition to the reinstatement, the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of continuity of service, but not the back wages. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:24.04.2008. kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}