Dismissed

K.N.Chary v. the Presiding Officer and Another

Telangana HC15 Feb 2022WA/703/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed the writ appeal filed by a driver deposed of from service after a fatal accident. Upholding the Single Judge's order, the Court refused to interfere with the Industrial Tribunal's award reinstating the appellant without back wages due to existing misconduct.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed; miscellaneous applications pending are closed; no order as to costs.

K.N.Chary Vs the Presiding Officer and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO: 703 OF 2009

¶7

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent the order Dt 24-03-2009 passed in W.P No.6166/2009 passed by His Lordship Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy on the fite of the High Court.

¶8

Between:

¶9

K.N.CHARY, S/o. Ramachandraiah, Driver APSRTC, Parkal Depot, Warangal District, R/o. Papaiahpet, Chennaraopet l,4andal, Warangal District.

¶10

...APPELLANT

¶11

AND

¶12

1, The Presiding Officer, lndustrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Warangal, Warangal District.

¶13

The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Narsampet Depot, Warangal District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2009(WAMP. NO: 1382 OF 2009)

¶16

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to fix an early date of hearing of the present writ appeal.

¶17

Counsel for the Appellant : SRI.S.PRADEEP KUMAR

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR LABOUR

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI.B.MAYUR REDDY^(SC FOR APSRTC)

¶20

The Court made the following ORDER

¶21

¶22

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CIIANDRA SIIARMA AND

¶23

TIIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶24

(

¶25

WRIT APPEAL No.7O3 of 2OO9

¶26

JUDGMENT! Per tle Hoft'bb th. ChielJustic€ &nsh Chond ra ShrLrma)

¶27

The present appeal is arising out of an order dated 24.O3.2OO9 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6166 of 2009.

¶28

The facts of the case reveal that the appellant was serving as a driver in the services of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Tra;rsport Corporation and on 20.06.2001, the bus driven by him met with an accident resulting in death of a cyclist. Disciplinar-v proceedings were initiated against the appellant and by an order dated 15.12.2001, the appellant was removed from service, The appellant has approached the Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court at Warangal (hereinafter referred to as, the Industrial Tribunal) by filing I.D.No.217 of 2003 and finally, an award was passed directing reinstatement of the appellant with continuity of service but without back wages and other attendant benefits. The appellant, being unsatisfied by the award dated 13.11.2006 passed by the Industria-l Tribunal, has preferred a writ petition in the year 2009 and the learned Single Judge, on the ground of delay and laches as well as on merits, has arrived at a conclusion that no case is made out for grant of any relief.

This court has carefully gone through the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The Industria-l Tribunal, taking into account Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 7947, has already directed reinstatement of the appellart with continuity of service, but without any back wages and other attendant benefits and t.Ile punishment of remova-1 was set aside, as the appellant has not worked during the period he was not in service.

¶33

\ \

¶34

This Court, keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct and keeping in vierv the fact that already a lenient vierv has been taken by the Industrial Tribunal in exercise of powers conferred under Section 1l-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶35

The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.

¶36

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shal1

¶37

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

""-JEXlj+}A33,t?ffifi //TRUE coPYi/ 6 To SECTION OFFICER 1. Iff","rnl: fl?ri"R LABouR. Hish court for the state of retansana at 432 One CC to SRI.S,i,RADEEP MAvUR REDDy KUMAR, asC Advocate IoPUCI;oR ;EdX;;irbpucr ilS 33 B;[:' 5 One spare copy SA SW \ M

¶39

HIGH COURT

¶40

DATED:.1510212022

¶41

{ ttE STa
( <br>)
2 6 FEB 2m2
<br>

ORDER

WA.N0.703^{of 2009}

I i

DISMISSING^THEW.A

WITHOUT COSTS.

\ u0
il-
7

K.N.Chary v. the Presiding Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.N.Chary v. the Presiding Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Venkatachary S/. Rajarajm Vs The Karimnagar -Addilabad Milk Producers Co-Operative-

Mohd. Ghani, Vs The Depot Manager

Toodi Bharat Ratna Vs Telangana State Human Rights Commission (Tshrc)

Jahangir Pasha Sk Vs The Chairman and another

Jayanagar Colony Welfare Association Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Syed Aslam Patel Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others