IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 2147 of 1999 Between: APSRTC., Rep. by Depot Manager, Hyderabad II Depot, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Chandra Vihar, Hyderabad. 2 Sri N. Laxmaiah, S/o Venkaiah, E.270444, H.No.799/1, B.N. Reddy Nagar, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Certiorari by calling for the records from the 1st respondent in ID.No. 23/98 dt:7.10.1998 published in G.O.Rt.No. 1988 dt:16.11.1998 and quash the Award and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner-A.P.S.R.T.C, seeking to issue a writ of certiorari and to quash the award dated 07.10.1998 passed by respondent No.1 in I.D.No.23 of 1998 published in G.O.Rt.No.1988, dated 16.11.1998. 2. The brief facts are that respondent No.2 herein was appointed as a conductor on daily wage basis on 18.05.1990 and thereafter his services were regularized with effect from 01.05.1991. During the course of a check conducted by the petitioner’s officers on 02.07.1997, some irregularities were detected from the service of respondent No.2. In the light of the said irregularities, respondent No.2 was charge sheeted and accordingly a charge sheet dated 14.07.1997 was issued. Respondent No.2 submitted his explanation to the said charges and after conducting a detailed enquiry, he was removed from service vide proceedings dated 27.10.1997. The appeal as well as the review petition filed by respondent No.2 was rejected. Questioning the said order of removal, he approached the Labour Court i.e., respondent No.1 and filed I.D. No.23 of 1998 and respondent No.1 by its award dated 07.10.1998 directed the petitioner’s Corporation to reinstate respondent No.2. In the said order, respondent No.1 also observed that though the petitioner is not entitled to back wages, he is entitled to have the continuity of service. Questioning the said order, this Writ Petition is filed. 3. Though the notice is served on respondent No.2, he has not chosen to put in his appearance. 4. Heard the learned standing counsel for the petitioner. 5. This Court while admitting the Writ Petition on 05.02.1999, passed the following order: “ It is brought to my notice that the respondent-workman is already reinstated into service pursuant to the award passed by the Labour Court. In the circumstances, there shall be interim stay of the operation of the award with regard to other benefits granted by the Labour Court”. 6. The learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner also produced the copy of the appointment order, whereby respondent No.2 was reinstated into service on 16.12.1998. The only grievance of the petitioner-Corporation is with regard to the continuity of service of respondent No.2. 7. As the petitioner had put in service of more than 10 years as of now, from the date of reinstatement, this Court is of the view that this Writ Petition can be disposed of without going deep into the matter. Now, as the petitioner is reinstated and when he had not put in his appearance, this Court unable to decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled to have continuity of service. 8. Therefore, the award dated 07.10.1998 in I.D. No.23 of 1998 passed by respondent No.1 is set aside in so far as the finding that continuity of service is concerned and the said re-instatement dated 16.12.1998 shall be treated as a fresh appointment for all purposes. 9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 3, 2009 KSH