1 APHC010580812016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17234/2016 Between: 1. THE DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, DHARMAVARAM DEPOT, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF MECHANICAL ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, HINDUPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. MANDALA PULLAIAH, S/O. M.GUNTEPPA, AGE: 51 YEARS, E.404419, SHRAMIK, R/O. D.NO.28-6-169 (LIG-461), NEAR L.G.BUS STOP, A.P.H.B. COLONY, DHARMAVARAM DEPOT, ANANTAPUR DISRICT. 2. THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.17234 of 2016 ORDER: The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner/APSRTC seeking the following main relief: “Issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to the award the I.D.No.10 of 2014, dated 15.06.2015, on the file of the Chairperson Cum Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Ananthapur, which was published in G.O.R.T.No.503, dt 13.10.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and quash the same and pass…..” 2. On 03.06.2016, this Court passed the following interim order: “There shall be interim stay to the extent of extending the benefit of continuity of service with all attendant benefits, until further orders.” 3. Consequently, the A.P.S.R.T.C. reinstated the 1st respondent / workman into service. Thereafter, the petitioner involved in unauthorized absenteeism case and as such he was removed from service vide proceedings No.M1/1(31)/2016, dated 06.01.2017 passed by the Corporation Authorities. The 1st respondent has not challenged the said orders before any authority and the same has attained finality. 4. Apparently, notice to the 1st respondent was served and he has not engaged any advocate. 4 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks closure of the Writ Petition, as no further orders are necessary in view of subsequent events. 6. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his legal remedies in accordance with law, if so advised. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date: 04.07.2025 M K K/Rns