HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.1564 and 1709 of 2002 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Kumar) By order dated 25/07/2002, a learned Single Judge of this Court allowed W.P.No.12642 of 1999 directing that the writ petitioner should be reinstated into service with continuity of service but with 50% of the back wages. The respondent in the writ petition, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for brevity ‘APSRTC’) preferred W.A.No.1709 of 2002 mainly aggrieved by the direction to pay 50% of the back wages, while the writ petitioner is in appeal in W.A.No.1564 of 2002 aggrieved by the denial of the balance 50% of the back wages. The writ petitioner was appointed as a driver in the service of the APSRTC in January, 1997. He was issued a charge sheet on 04/12/1998 by the APSRTC alleging that the driving licence possessed by him was not genuine. Thereafter, by proceedings dated 10/05/1999, the APSRTC terminated the services of the writ petitioner. The same was subjected to challenge in the writ petition. The learned Judge, having called for a counter-affidavit from the Additional Licencing Authority, Office of the Regional Transport Office, Rajahmundry, found that the writ petitioner had been issued a light motor vehicle licence in 1984 and thereafter, he was also issued a licence to drive heavy vehicles in the year 1987. The Licencing Authority also certified that the writ petitioner’s licence had been renewed from time to time. In the light of this finding, the learned Judge held that there was no valid reason or basis for the termination of the writ petitioner from service and accordingly set aside the termination order. In consequence, the learned Judge directed the reinstatement of the writ petitioner in service with continuity of service. In so far as the grant of back wages is concerned, the learned Judge observed that it was not certain as to whether the writ petitioner was gainfully employed elsewhere and therefore limited the relief to 50% of the back wages. It is, however, to be noticed that in paragraph 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the writ petitioner had specifically stated that he had no source of income except the driver job in the corporation and due to illegal removal from service he was facing much hardship to eke-out his livelihood. The APSRTC did not choose to rebut this statement by filing a counter-affidavit. In the light of the petitioner’s averment which remained unrebutted, it can be safely assumed that the writ petitioner was not gainfully employed during the period that he remained out of the service of the APSRTC. As rightly pointed out by the learned Judge, the termination of the petitioner from service was without any legal basis as the licencing authority itself certified that the petitioner’s licence was valid and genuine. In such circumstances, there is no reason as to why the writ petitioner should be penalized for the wrongful action on the part of the APSRTC in terminating his services without proper enquiry into the matter. The writ petitioner would therefore be entitled to full back wages for the period that he remained out of service owing to the illegal action on the part of the APSRTC. W.A.No.1564 of 2002 is accordingly allowed directing the APSRTC to remit the full back wages payable to the writ petitioner for the period that he remained out of service, i.e., from 10/05/1999 up to the date of his reinstatement pursuant to the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.12642 of 1999. W.A.No.1709 of 2002 filed by the APSRTC is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ Date: 15-09-2009 SANJAY KUMAR, J SKM