Telangana High Court
WP/40912/2014 of K.S.Reddy, E.No.93656, Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, on 31 December 2014
R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.40912 of 2014 Date: 31-12-2014 Between K.S.Reddy and another … Petitioners and The APSRTC, Rep. by its MD, Musheerabad, Hyderabad; and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.40912 of 2014 Order: Heard Sri
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
Writ Petition No.40912 of 2014
Date: 31-12-2014
Between
K.S.Reddyand another
… Petitioners
and
The APSRTC,Rep. by its MD,Musheerabad, Hyderabad;and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAOWrit Petition No.40912 of 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order:
Heard Sri Chidagam Srinivas, learned counselappearing for the petitioner and Sri Aravala Rama Rao,the learned Standing Counsel appearing for therespondents-Corporation.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare theaction of the respondents-Corporation in not releasing theconsequential service and retiral benefits keeping in viewof the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1926 and 1925 of 2005, dated 28-7-2009 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently directthe respondents-Corporation to release all the service andretiral benefits treating the petitioners in service, dulykeeping the above judgment rendered by the DivisionBench of this Court.
3. The petitioners while working as conductors in therespondents-Corporation were removed from service oncertain irregularities. They filed I.D.Nos.49 and 48 of 2002before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,Anantapur and the same were dismissed vide awardsdated 18-6-2003 and 13-6-2003, respectively. Aggrievedby the same, the petitioners filed W.P.Nos.8277 and 8308of 2004, respectively and the same were also dismissedvide orders dated 19-8-2005. Thereafter, they filedW.A.Nos.1926 and 1925 of 2005, respectively and a Division Bench of this Court vide common judgmentdated 28-7-2009 disposed of batch of writ appealsincluding W.A.Nos.1926 and 1925 of 2005, observing thatthere was no evidence that the conductors themselvesproduced the fake warrants and misappropriated themoney. Accordingly, the Division Bench modified thepunishment imposed upon the petitioners and othersimilarly situated persons, setting aside the orders ofremoval from service, directing their reinstatement intoservice, if not already retired, and imposing the lesserpunishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect.
4. The case of the petitioners is that in view of thejudgment of the Division Bench, they are entitled for all thebenefits treating them as in service after duly giving effectto the penalty imposed by the Division Bench. However,the respondents-Corporation have not been releasingtheir service and retiral benefits.
5. It is agreed by both the learned counselappearing for the parties that the issue raised in this writpetition is squarely covered by the orders passed by thisCourt in W.P.No.439 of 2013, dated 20-9-2014.
6. In the aforesaid writ petition, following thecommon judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.1910and 2005 and batch (including W.A.Nos.1926 and 1925 of2005), dated 28-7-2009, while setting aside the order ofremoval from service passed against the petitionertherein, lesser punishment of withholding of twoincrements with cumulative effect is directed to besubstituted therefor, which shall take effect from the dateof the orders of the earlier punishment. It was furtherordered that the petitioner shall be granted continuity ofservice in view of the setting aside of the removal ordersand the same shall be taken into account for reckoninghis pensionary benefits after giving effect to thesubstituted punishment of withholding of increments.
Accordingly, directed the Corporation to complete theexercise and make due payment to the petitioner within a period of four weeks.
7. In view of the above, the respondents-Corporationare directed to treat the petitioners as if they continued inservice in view of the setting aside the order of removalfrom service, and the same shall be taken into account forreckoning their pensionary benefits, after giving effect tothe substituted punishment of withholding of twoincrements, which shall start from the date of earlierpunishment, and release the service and retiral benefits tothe petitioners within a period of 4 (four) weeks from thedate of receipt of a copy of this order.
Conclusion
8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.
The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writpetition shall stand closed. No costs.
31[st] December, 2014.Ak
___________________
R.KANTHA RAO, J.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
Writ Petition No.40912 of 2014
31[st] December, 2014.(Ak)