IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 981 of 2005 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 29/10/2004 in WP NO: 5088 OF 1997 on the file of the High Court.) Between: M.A.Saleem, S/o.M.A.Hameem, R/o.H.No.5-620, Iqbalahmed Nagar, Mancherial, Adilabad District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Hon'ble Industrial -cum-Labour Court, Godavarikhani, rep.by its Presiding officer. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad Bus Depot, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr.V.T.M.PRASAD, Standing Counsel for APSRTC. The Court at the stage of admission made the following JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The appellant was working as a Conductor in the second respondent- Corporation. On the ground that the appellant committed certain irregularities, an enquiry was conducted and he was removed from the service, through the order, dated 17.12.1985. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant moved the Labour Court, by filing I.D.No.286 of 1991, to quash the order of termination. Having gone through the material available on record, the Labour Court held that the punishment of removal imposed on the appellant was not proper and just, and therefore, set aside the order of removal of the appellant and ordered his reinstatement as a fresh conductor, with pension and other attendant benefits, with continuity of previous service, with back wages to the extent of 50% from 01.07.1990 only. Dissatisfied with the same, the appellant filed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge set aside the Award of the Labour Court to the extent of granting the attendant benefits for the previous service as well as ordering 50% of the back wages. It is further directed that the respondents shall count the past service of the petitioner for the purpose of terminal benefits and not for any other purpose. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the writ appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the relief granted by the Labour Court to the extent of granting 50% back wages has already been implemented by the respondent-Corporation. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, no cause survives in this writ appeal. Hence, the wit appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------------- ( T. Meena Kumari.J) ------------------------------- (P. Lakshmana Reddy.J) ksld Dt.09.06.2005 To 1 The Presiding Officer, Industrial -cum-Labour Court, Godavarikhani. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad Bus Depot, Hyderabad. 3 Two CCs to the G.P. for Labour, High Court Buildings, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.(OUT) 4 2 CD copies