IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 4191 of 1996 Between: The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Sidipet Depot, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Hyderabad. 2 P.Mallaiah, C/o V.R.Balachari, Advocate, R/o 22-1-376, Sultanpura, Hyderabad-24. HYD .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and call for the records of the case in I.D.No.392 on the file of 1st respondent herein, and quash the award dated 03.04.1995 passed by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.V.SIVAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: O R D E R: The petitioner is the Corporation who seeks to assail, by way of Writ of Certiorari, the award passed in I.D.No.392 of 1992 dated 03-04- 1995 on the file of the first respondent in pursuance of a reference under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) at the instance of the second respondent. The facts of the case, which are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition, are that the second respondent, who has been working as a conductor since 1979, was removed from service on 13-02-1981. According to the second respondent, he has been suffering with “Adenictis dypies” disease and undergone treatment from 02-02- 1981 to 15-02-1981 due to which he reported to his duty on 16-02- 1981. But, in the meanwhile, his services were terminated on 13-02- 1981. Aggrieved by the same, he filed an appeal before the Regional Manager. As the said appeal was not considered, he preferred the I.D. before the Labour Court. However, during the pendency of the I.D., the petitioner filed a memo agreeing to reinstate the second respondent into service with continuity of service, back wages and attendant benefits. The second respondent appeared to have endorsed the memo agreeing for reinstatement with continuity of service with attendant benefits. Thereupon, the Labour Court by an order dated 28-03-1995 directed reinstatement of the second respondent subject to the decision to be given regarding the continuity of service, back wages and attendant benefits. Subsequently, when the matter was taken up, no domestic enquiry report has been produced. Therefore, the Labour Court found that the petitioner failed to produce any records relating to the domestic enquiry. The Labour Court held that in the absence of the regular enquiry, the domestic enquiry conducted by the petitioner was invalid, and accordingly, while taking into consideration the memo filed by the petitioner, set aside the order terminating the services of the second respondent and directed the petitioner to reinstate the second respondent into service with continuity of service including back wages and attendant benefits. Having considered the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the material on record, it is seen that there was no report or material to show that there was any domestic enquiry conducted by the petitioner. Further, the petitioner having agreed for reinstatement of the second respondent into service cannot deny the same unless he is found guilty of any other allegations. It is only due to some disease the second respondent could not possibly attend to his duties, as a result of which his services were terminated. In the absence of any enquiry or proper proceedings as contemplated under law, it is not open for the petitioner to seek indulgence from this Court. Therefore, I do not find any merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________________ (B. PRAKASH RAO, J) Date: 24-11-2004 ghn To 1 The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Hyderabad. 2 Two CCs to Govt. Pleader for Labour, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 3. Two CD copies.