HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WA No.1429 of 2011 JUDGMENT: ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J ) This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 23-08-2011 passed in WP No.24055 of 2010 by the workman in so far it relates to denial of the relief to count his service to enable him benefits for the period from 21-10-2003 to 1-09-2011. 2. The facts stated are:-The workman-appellant herein joined the Corporation as Cleaner and eventually promoted as Mechanic in the year 1994. Through proceedings dated 21-10-2003, the Depot Manager, Banswada, removed the workman-appellant from service on the ground of unauthorized absence. After availing the statutory remedies, the workman raised ID No.87 of 2005 on the file of Labour Court-II, Hyderabad. By award dated 12-8-2008, the Labour Court while setting aside the order of removal directed reinstatement with continuity of service, but without back wages. It is stated that based on the award of the Labour Court, the Regional Manager issued proceedings dated 5-12-2008 directing the workman to report duty within one week. It is further stated that the workman did not report to duty as directed. Through proceedings dated 26-2-2009, the Regional Manager cancelled the order dated 5-12-2008 on the ground that the workman did not report to duty within one week as directed vice proceedings dated 5-12-2008. Aggrieved by the same, the workman filed the writ petition. The learned single Judge of this Court having noticed the reason assigned by the workman that he could not join the duties as directed through proceedings dated 5-12-2008 on account of death of the workman’s mother partly allowed the writ petition and directed the workman to join duty by 1-9-2011, but however, observed that the workman shall be entitled to count service to avail other benefits for the period from 21-10-2003 to 1-9-2011. The workman is aggrieved by this portion of the order passed by the learned single Judge. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-workman and the learned standing counsel for the respondent-APSRTC. Perused the order impugned. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant strenuously contended that the workman could not join the duty as per the proceedings of the Regional Manager dated 5-12-2008 only for the reason that the mother of the workman died on 4-12-2008 and he has filed the death certificate of his mother. 5. It is case of unauthorized absence and there are no other allegations made against the workman. The fact that the workman was directed to be re-instated into service by proceedings of the Regional Manager dated 5-2-2009 was within the knowledge of the workman. There is no material that the workman attempted to sought for time for joining the duty. In the circumstances, the workman shall not be entitled to count service to avail the service benefits for the period from 8-12-2008 (i.e the date on which the workman received the letter of appointment re-instating him into service) to 26-8-2011 (i.e. the date on which he reported for duty) instead of 21-10-2003 to 1-9-2011 as observed by the learned single Judge. 6. Subject to the above modification of the impugned order, the writ appeal is allowed in part. No costs. _______________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J _________________________ Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J Dated :28-12-2011 Nrg.