APHC010775602012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24379/2012 Between: The Depot Manager, ...PETITIONER AND The Hon Ble Labour Court and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SATYANARAYAN MURTHY(SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following Order: The petitioner is challenging the award passed in I.D.No.26 of 2007, dated 17.06.2011. The 2nd respondent, while working as a driver, caused an accident on 19.02.2002 resulting in the death of a lady rider of a two-wheeler. A charge was framed, and an enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer held the 2nd respondent responsible for causing the accident and recommended the punishment of removal from service, which was imposed on 17.08.2002. 2 2. The 2nd respondent filed an appeal and review before the appellate and review authorities, which were dismissed, and thereafter filed I.D.No.26 of 2007. The Labour Court examined the issue in totality, considered all the evidence submitted, and found that the punishment from removal from service was disproportionate. The Labour Court ordered reinstatement into service; however, it denied back wages but extended continuity of service for the purpose of increment and pension. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent caused a fatal accident resulting in the death of the lady rider. As such, the punishment is justified. However, the Labour Court directed reinstatement. 4. It is also submitted that, as on the date of admission of the writ petition, the 2nd respondent had already been reinstated, and the same was informed to this Court. This Court, on 07.08.2012, recorded the reinstatement of the 2nd respondent and granted interim suspension of the award in respect of other reliefs only. 5. No counter-affidavit is filed. 6. Perused the record. The award passed by the Labour Court has categorically considered the issues involved and also recorded 3 that the two-wheeler rider was operating the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and did not possess a valid license. That apart, the driver of the moped was found to be the cause of the accident resulting in death of the lady pillion rider. 7. Having found the moped rider responsible for causing the accident, the punishment of removal from service was found to be disproportionate, and as such, the Labour Court rightly set aside the same. No grounds have seen set out to dislodge the well- considered award, and considering the fact that the petitioner has subsequently complied with the award by reinstating the 2nd respondent, this Court finds no grounds to deny the extension of continuity of service for the purpose of increment and pension. 8. Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 19.02.2025 NKA 4 26 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.24379 of 2012 Date: 19.02.2025 NKA