IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33504 of 2011 Between: R.Rajeswar … Petitioner and The Regional Manager, APSRTC., Secunderabad Region, and another. … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33504 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as contract Conductor on 11.05.2006 and later on vide proceedings dated 15.05.2007 he was terminated from service on the allegation of absenteeism. No enquiry was conducted before passing the order of termination. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal that was rejected on 14.07.2011 and on filing the review, considered the same and ordered for re-engagement vide proceedings dated 02.09.2011 as a fresh contract Driver. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that while issuing orders of re-engagement, the respondents did not extend the benefit of continuity of service. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed a copy of the order dated 02.08.2011 passed by this Court in W.P. No.21707 of 2011. From a perusal of the said order, it is clear that this Court held in W.P. No.8090 of 2010 on 12.04.2010 that the contractual employees, who are re-engaged on the orders of removal being set aside, are entitled to the benefit of past service. Following the same, this writ petition is disposed of directing that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of service between the date of termination and the date of re-engagement. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits on account of this relief. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 20.12.2011 LSK