HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 16979 OF 2000 Between: The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Piler, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND The Labour Court, Anantapur and one another .....RESPONDENTS ORAL ORDER: The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), the respondent in I.D.No. 161 of 1996 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ananthapur, filed the present Writ Petition aggrieved by the award dated 31.12.1999 passed therein, whereby it was directed to fix the salary of the second respondent in the post of Cleaner and pay him backwages from the date of forwarding of the application submitted by him for appointment to the post of Cleaner till he attained the age of superannuation. This Court, while admitting the Writ Petition on 13.9.2000, granted interim stay of the award under challenge subject to the condition that the APSRTC deposits half of the backwages awarded by the Labour Court. Despite service of notice, the second respondent chose not to put in his appearance before this Court. The undisputed facts of the case are that the second respondent joined the service of the APSRTC as a Driver in the year 1975. He was found medically unfit to continue in the said post in the year 1995 and was accordingly kept under forced leave with effect from 13.9.1995. His services were terminated with effect from 13.9.1996. Aggrieved thereby, he raised an Industrial Dispute by way of the subject I.D under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. After examination of the material on record, the Labour Court found that the second respondent was entitled to be given alternative employment in a Cadre II job as per the APSRTC’s Circular dated 12.6.1995 but was not so provided, owing to want of vacancy. It also found that the second respondent’s application for appointment as a cleaner was forwarded by the Depot Manager, APSRTC Depot, Piler to the Personnel Officer, APSRTC, Hyderabad. In the light of its own circular, the Labour Court held that the APSRTC was bound to provide alternative employment to its disabled drivers and as the APSRTC had failed to do so in the instant case, it granted relief, keeping in mind the fact that the second respondent had by then attained the age of superannuation. Having given thoughtful consideration to the matter on hand, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Labour Court. Apart from the fact that the APSRTC is bound to give effect to its own circular, it is also under a statutory obligation under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 to provide alternative employment to its disabled employees and it cannot cast them out despite their long and loyal service only on the ground of such disability. The action of the APSRTC in disengaging the services of the second respondent as there was no vacancy to accommodate him therefore falls foul of not only the circular instructions but also the statute. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J DATE: 30.08.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies.