" IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVA (Special Original Jurisdiction) 5^3 I tJt THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRI&^.^^S TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ii PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14708 OF 2018 Between: 1. The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh Corporation, Puttoor Depot, Chittoor District. 2. The Deputy Chief Traffic Manager, Andhra Pradesh Transport Corporation, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 3. The Regional Manager, Andhra Pradesh Corporation, Tirupati, Chittoor District. State Road Transport State Road State Road Transport ...Petitioners AND 1. A.G. Vinayagam @ A.G. Vinayakam, Aged 36 years, E-552655 Ex Conductor, R/o. D. No 10-573, Ammankoil Street, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 2. The Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Anantapuramu, Anantapuramu district. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to Issue an appropriate Writ Order one award made in I.D. No. 25 of 2014, dated 21.01.2015 praying that in may or direction more particularly relating to the on the file of the m the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for records Labour Court, Anantapur, which G.O.Rt.No. 270, dated 15.05.2015 was published in the gazette vide as illegal arbitrary and quash the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2nifi 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 suspend the operation of the award dated 21.01.2015 made in I.D. No. 25 of 2014 on the file of Industrial Tribunal -.cum Labour Court, Ananthapur pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010319322018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14708/2018 Between: The Depot Manager, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND A G Vinayagam A G Vinayakam and Others Counsel for the Petitloner(S): ...RESPONDENT(S) 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 2. The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “ to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to the award made in I.D.No.25 of 2014, dated 21.01.2015 on the file of the Labour Court, 2 s Anantapur, which was published in the gazette vide G.O.Rt.No.270, dated 15.05.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and quash the same and pass such other order or orders ” 2. Heard Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Labour, appearing for the 2’^^ respondent. St 3. Learned Standing Counsel for petitioners would submit that the 1 respondent worked as Conductor in APSRTC. Because of his unauthorized absence for six days from 23.02.2008 to 29.03.2008, disciplinary action has been initiated against him. His guilt is proved and he was removed from service. Against which, he preferred appeal that was rejected. Thereafter, he preferred review that was also rejected. Subsequently, the respondent after lapse of seven years, filed I.D.No.25 of 2014 before the Labour Court, Anantapur, that was allowed on 21.01.2015 by setting aside the order of removal and ordered to reinstate him into service with continuity of service and with all attendant benefits except back-wages within one month from the St date of publication of the Award. Learned counsel would submit that the 1 respondent being the Conductor has to maintain highest discipline in the Department. If the individual is left with no punishment, the other employees also may follow him. Learned counsel would further submit that there should be some punishment to the person, who has done misconduct by absent from 3 duty without obtaining any leave or prior permission. Learned counsel finally prays to allow the petition by setting aside the impugned order passed by the Labour Court. Notice which was sent to the respondent returned as un-claimed. 4. None represented on his behalf. s Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material 5. St placed on record, because of unauthorized absence for six days, the 1 It is his explanation that he was respondent was removed from service, suffering from serious ill-health, that was not considered by the Department. Of course, he preferred appeal and review, that were rejected. The individual approached the Labour Court and the Labour Court considered his claim and passed award in his favour, against which, the Department preferred the present petition. Learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court has taken a very correct view since the punishment awarded to the individual is quite disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Learned Judge has also followed the balancing approach while directing the Corporation to reinstate the individual without 6. back-wages. In that view, the impugned award does not brook any interference of 7. this Court while exercising the writ jurisdiction. 4 4 s 8. 'n the result, the Writ Petition i'S dismissed. There Shall be to costs. no order as As a sequel thereto, mi miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall closed. stand ASS(STa®NT^^^. officer //true copy// To, SEi T Oneccto Sri. 2- Two CCs to GP 3- Three CD Copies Aravala Rama Rao(SC for Labour, High forAPSRTC) fOPUCJ court Of Andhra Pradesh fOUTJ GSC V HIGH COURT DATE 0:24/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.14708of2018 DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS