HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.M.P.No.30169 of 2010 & WRIT PETITION No.15049 OF 2002 Dated 16-11-2010 Between: K.Sudhakar. …Petitioner. And: Regional Manager APSRTC, Warangal and another. ……Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.M.P.No.30169 of 2010 & WRIT PETITION No.15049 OF 2002 COMMON ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents by disengaging the petitioner and depriving his livelihood and violating his fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 is arbitrary, unconstitutional, contrary to law, opposed to the public policy and against the principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the respondents to re- instate the petitioner as driver in Mahaboobabad Depot and pay all his back wages considering his seniority and all other service benefits. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: The petitioner was appointed by the 1st respondent on 11-3- 1996 as H.M.V. Driver through Office Order No.E1/684 (2)/96- KRMR-1 on daily wages basis at Karimnagar. The petitioner has been discharging his duties to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors. On 21-5-1996 at about 5.30 hours, the petitioner drove the heavy vehicle bearing No.A.P 9 Z-9841 with due care and caution but the cyclist and his pillion rider were injured due to their own negligence. But, the petitioner was terminated from his services arbitrarily on 30-5-1996 without considering his loyal services to the department. The petitioner filed a review petition and appealed to the Regional Manager, Karimnagar who in turn conducted the proceedings and by taking a lenient view and considering the gravity of the offence, reinstated the petitioner on compassionate grounds vide proceedings No.Peshi/19/(34)/98- RM:KRMR dated 17-7-1998. After reinstatement of the petitioner, he was discharging his duties with utmost care and caution without causing any inconvenience to any of his colleagues or superiors. But when the petitioner went to report his duty on 1-7-2002, he was astonished to learn that the 1st respondent has already made an endorsement on 1-7-2002 in his office records that he has disengaged the petitioner by stating that due to slack season, the petitioner must not continue to do his job. The petitioner requested the 1st respondent to issue memo stating the reason for his disengagement but the 1st respondent has refused to do so. While so, the 1st respondent has regulated the services of 63 HMV Drivers through office order No.P2/255 (8)/97-RM: WL dated 3-6-1997. The 1st respondent issued this order when the petitioner was terminated from his services due to minor incident. But the 1st respondent has failed to include the petitioner’s name even after reinstatement and has deprived the livelihood of the petitioner by disengaging his services and removing from services without any genuine cause or reason. The petitioner has already completed more than 287 days and the services of his juniors have already been regularized, and hence, the action of the 1st respondent is arbitrary and contrary to law. The petitioner is a hardworking HMV Driver and he has old parents and family with two kids and the entire family is depending only him. Hence, the writ petition. No counter is filed. Heard the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. On 16-8-2002, this Court while admitting the writ petition, granted interim direction to the respondent-authorities to reinstate the petitioner as prayed for in W.P.M.P.No.18832 of 2002. Since neither any representation is made nor any counter is filed on behalf of the respondents, the interim direction granted on 16.8.2002, is made absolute on 24-8-2004. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner filed W.P.M.P.No.30169 of 2010 seeking to direct the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services with effect from 1-1-2000 on which date junior to the petitioner i.e., A.Venkataiah No.650875 was regularized with all consequential benefits. Admittedly, the petitioner was re-instated into service pursuant to the interim order granted by this Court. Thereafter, the Corporation on its own regularized the services of one A.Venkataiah No.650875 with all consequential benefits with effect from 1-1-2000 on which date the said Venkataiah was junior to the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the petitioner is being continued in service pursuant to the interim direction granted by this Court, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services in accordance with law. With the above direction, this writ petition along with the W.P.M.P. are disposed of. No costs. __________________________ Justice G.CHANDRAIAH Dated 16-11-2010. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.M.P.No.30169 of 2010 & WRIT PETITION No.15049 OF 2002 Dated 16-11-2010