IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH SATURDAY THIS THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.439 of 2013 Between:
S.Basha Saheb . PETITIONERS And The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and 2 others . RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.439 of 2013
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the consequential service and retrial benefits keeping in view of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1926/2005 dated 28.07.2009 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release all the service and retrial benefits treating the petitioner in service.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner while working as Conductor in the respondent corporation was removed from service on certain irregularities. The petitioner filed I.D.No.47/2002 before the Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Anantapur and the same was dismissed vide Award dated 18.06.2003. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.8277/2004 and the same was also dismissed vide orders dated 19.08.2005. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.A.No.1926/2005 and the Division Bench of this Court vide orders dated 28.07.2009 disposed of batch of writ appeals including W.A.No.1926/2005, observing that there was no evidence that the Conductors themselves produced the fake warrants and misappropriated the money. Accordingly, the Division Bench modified the punishment imposed upon the petitioner and other similarly situated persons, setting aside the orders of removal from service, directing their reinstatement into service, if not already retired, and imposing the lesser punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect.
The case of the petitioner is that in view of the order of the Division Bench, he is entitled for all the benefits treating him as in service after duly giving effect to the penalty imposed by the Division Bench. However, the respondents have not been releasing his service and retrial benefits.
It is agreed by both the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by orders passed by a single Judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.120 & 1443 of 2004, and W.P.No.961 of 2010.
In the aforesaid writ petitions, following the judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.1926/2005 and batch, while setting aside the order of removal from service passed against the petitioners therein, lesser punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect is directed to be substituted therefor, which shall take effect from the date of the orders of the earlier punishment. It is further ordered that the petitioners shall be granted continuity of service in view of the setting aside of the removal orders and the same shall be taken into account for reckoning their pensionary benefits after giving effect to the substituted punishment of withholding of increments. Accordingly, directed the Corporation to complete the exercise and make due payment to the petitioners within a period of one month.
In view of the above, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as if he continued in service in view of the setting aside the order of removal from service, and the same shall be taken into account for reckoning his pensionary benefits, after giving effect to the substituted punishment of withholding of two increments, which shall start from the date of earlier punishment, and release the service and retrial benefits to the petitioner within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.
R.KANTHA RAO,J Date: 20.09.2014 Dsr