Writ petitions challenging reinstatement orders denying continuity of service to contract driver and conductor. Court directed entitlement to past service benefits without monetary relief.
Petitioners entitled to benefit of service between termination and re-engagement; no monetary benefit; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH
W.P.NOS.29159 AND 29179 OF 2011
COMMON ORDER
The petitioners in these writ petitions were working as contract Driver and Conductor of the respondent – Corporation. They were terminated from service by orders dated 8.6.2007 and 12.11.2008 on the allegations of unauthorized absence. The case of the petitioners is that they were terminated without conducting any enquiry and hence, the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice. On appeal being filed, by orders dated 29.1.2010 and 11.2.2009, they were reinstated into service as fresh Driver and Conductor, without continuity of service. Aggrieved by the impugned orders in denying continuity of service, the present writ petitions are filed.
2. This court in similar facts and circumstances, in W.P.No.8090 of 2010 dated 12.4.2010 held that the contractual employees, who were re-engaged on the orders of removal being set aside, are entitled for the benefit of past service.
3. Following the same, the present writ petitions are allowed and it is directed that the petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of service between the date of termination and the date of re-engagement. However, petitions shall not entitled to any monetary benefit on account of this relief. There shall be no order as to costs.
01—11—2011
AVS -------------------------------------
2 issues framed by the court
Whether contractual employees reinstated after termination without continuity of service are entitled to the benefit of past service.
Whether such entitlement should extend to monetary benefits alongside continuity of service.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.No.8090 of 2010 dated 12.4.2010Followed¶5
Petitioners
Respondent – Corporation
G. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
