Partly allowed

Mr.Beda Narayanayya v. The Andhra Pradesh STate Road Transport Corporation

Telangana HC1 Jul 2011WP/28604/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking reinstatement in service for an APSRTC driver removed for unauthorized absence. The court reinstated the petitioner without back wages, restricting past service continuity only for retirement benefits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner reinstated in service without back wages; past service counted only for retirement benefits.

Mr.Beda Narayanayya Vs The Andhra Pradesh… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.28604 of 2010

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner was appointed as a Driver in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in the year 2005. Through order, dated 30.05.2008, the Depot Manager, Kavali, respondent No.2 herein, removed the petitioner from service after conducting enquiry on the ground of unauthorized absence. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected, but in the review, the Regional Manager, respondent No.1 herein, passed an order, dated 16.12.2008, directing that the petitioner be reinstated into service as a fresh candidate. The benefit of all his past service was denied for all purposes. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the said order.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶6

Respondent No.1 is competent to impose any punishment of his choice in the place of the one of removal from service. However, that shall be the one, which finds place in the Regulations. Directing as to appointment of a Driver afresh is not treated as punishment. This Court in K.C.Narayana Vs. Managing

¶7

Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Hyderabad^[1] has taken a view that the Regional Manager is not empowered to impose such a punishment. Strictly speaking, the matter must go back for fresh consideration and disposal. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner remained unauthorisedly absent, this Court feels that the direction for reinstatement of the petitioner into service, but without back wages and restricting the continuity of service

¶8

only for the purpose of terminal benefits would meet the ends of justice. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of modifying the order, dated 16.12.2008, passed by respondent No.1 to be the one of reinstatement of the petitioner into service, but without back wages. The past service rendered by the petitioner shall be reckoned only for the purpose of computation of retirement benefits and not any other purposes. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶9

_______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J

¶10

Dt: 19.11.2010.

¶11

kdl

¶12

[1] 2007(5) ALD 416

Mr.Beda Narayanayya v. The Andhra Pradesh STate Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Beda Narayanayya v. The Andhra Pradesh STate Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mandapaka Krishnaveni Vs Malladi Sarojini Devi

M.G. Amaranth, Vs Sri Mrutyunjay Sahoo

Nemani Krishna Rajasekhar Vs Sri V.N. Vishnu, S/o Not known to the petitioner

Minnekanti Venkata Rama Rao Vs Pentyala lakshmi Rajyam , Minnekanti Lakshmi Rajyam , Jaya S

Immadi Durgamma Vs Immadi Venkateswarlu

Myrala Krupamma, Vs Pathuri Seseela