APHC010442552019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21268/2019 Between: 1. M. CHANDRA SHAKAR REDDY,, E 502270, CONDUCTOR, APSRTC, PELERU DEPOT, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O 4-100, SUDHEER STREET, PELERU, CHITTOR DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC, PELERU DEPOT, PELERU, CHITTOR DIST. 2. HONBLE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DIST. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P GOVINDA RAJULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a writ of Certiorari, call for the records in ID NO. 281 of 2002, dated. 31-5-2002 on the file of 2nd respondent and declare the same as illegal and arbitrary and quash the Award in ID NO. 281 of 2002, dated. 31-5-2002 in so for against to the petitioner in denying the continuity of service and reducing the pay by five annual increments with cumulative effect and denial of all attendant benefits including wages and further direct the 1st respondent to grant all consequential benefits including continuity of service and all attendant benefits and wages.” 2 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC, would submit that there are no justifiable grounds in the writ petition. It is further submitted that the present writ petition is filed belatedly i.e., after seventeen years of the impugned order. Therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the point of delay and laches. 3. Sri Govinda Rajulu, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders by giving liberty to the Petitioner to file fresh petition. 4. Considering the submissions made and a bare perusal of the material on record would show that the Petitioner herein is a Conductor in APSRTC and in view of the irregularities committed by him, he was terminated by the Disciplinary Authority. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner preferred appeal and review before the Appellate Authority, which were also rejected. Impugning the punishment order, the Petitioner filed I.D.No.281 of 1999 before Labour Court, Ananthapuramu, wherein, the Labour Court vide Award dated 31.05.2002 set aside the termination order directing the Respondent to issue fresh appointment to the Petitioner by reducing his pay to five annual increments with cumulative effect. However, the present petition has been filed by the Petitioner in the year 2019 i.e., after seventeen years of the Award in I.D.No.281 of 1999. No sufficient cause is offered by the Petitioner for the said inordinate delay. The laches on the part of the Petitioner in filing the 3 present writ petition belatedly, is not supported by any plausible explanation. In such, circumstances, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:08.05.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.21268 of 2019 Dt.08.05.2025 Dinesh