THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.17979 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of first respondent in ordering fresh re- engagement of the petitioner as contract Conductor as illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable, as the termination of the petitioner is against the principles of natural justice and against the Corporation circulars, and consequently direct the respondents to treat first respondent’s proceedings, dated 16.12.2009, as re-engagement with continuity of service with all consequential service benefits. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition may be stated as follows:- The petitioner was appointed as contract Conductor in the respondent Corporation in the year 2006 and has been working thereunder. While so, he was terminated from service on 18.04.2008 by respondent No.2 on the ground of unauthorized absenteeism from 14.03.2008 to 16.03.2008, 18.03.2008 to 01.04.2008 and from 06.04.2008 to 17.04.2008. On an appeal preferred by the petitioner to respondent No.1, he was reinstated into service on 17.07.2008. Later, the petitioner was terminated from service on 29.09.2009 by respondent No.2 on the allegation of unauthorized absenteeism on 18.03.2009, 20.03.2009, 24.03.2009 and 28.03.2009 to 31.03.2009. Subsequently, he came to be re-engaged on the basis of the orders passed by the appellate authority-respondent No.1 on 16.12.2009. 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. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no enquiry was conducted; that in cases of similarly situated persons, this Court ordered for continuity of service from the date of termination till the date of re-engagement for the purpose of regularization, but without monetary benefits, and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation contended that the petitioner was absent unauthorisedly on 18.03.2009, 20.03.2009, 24.03.2009 and 28.03.2009 to 31.03.2009 and thereby caused inconvenience to the respondent Corporation, which resulted in issuance of the termination order, dated 29.09.2009, by following the due process of law, but the same was set aside by the appellate authority by its proceedings, dated 16.12.2009, having regard to the fact that the petitioner previously worked in the respondent Corporation and he got some experience; that the petitioner has no interest at all in serving the Corporation and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief. 5. In similar cases where contract Conductors and Conductors approached this Court questioning the order passed by the appellate authority/revisional authority wherein they were not considered for continuity of service, this Court set aside those orders on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and ordered for continuity of service from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement only for the purpose of regularization of services, but without monetary benefits. Two orders of that nature passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.22283 of 2011 and 12333 of 2011 are referred to as under: “Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall extend the benefit of counting of past service for the purpose of regularization of service and not for any other monetary benefit. There shall be no order as to costs.” “The writ petition is allowed and it is also directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of continuity of service between the date of termination and the date of re- engagement, only for purposes of regularization. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any monetary or other benefits in pursuance of this order. No costs.” 6. Following the same, the Writ Petition is allowed directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for providing continuity of service from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement into service for the purpose of regularization of his services, if the Corporation takes a decision to regularize the services of the petitioner, but without any monetary benefits. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH 21st December, 2011 AMD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.17979 OF 2010 Date:21.12.2011 AMD