S.M.S. VALI Vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
LAWS(APH)-2022-6-7
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on June 20,2022

S.M.S. Vali Appellant
VERSUS
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Respondents

JUDGEMENT

DR.K.MANMADHA RAO,J. - (1.) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: ".....to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus to declare the 1st respondent impugned proceedings No.GC1/19/2014-PO-1, dtd. 24/1/2015 as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the impugned order dtd. 24/1/2015 and further direct the 1st respondent to fix the pay scale as regular driver due to utilized the services of petitioner after reversion as Helper post and pass such other orders".
(2.) The brief case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Cleaner in the respondent corporation on 2/8/1975 and posted at Anantapur Depot. Subsequently he got promotion as Grade-II Driver on 29/5/1986 and posted to Srikalahasti Depot and again transferred to Tirupati-I Depot in the year 1994. On 13/5/1995 the petitioner was taken over the bus Tirupati to Hyderabad, while he was proceeding towards Hyderabad a Lorry bearing No. AAQ 3611 coming on the opposite direction with high speed with heavy iron load and suddenly turned his vehicle to the right side and dashed the bus in the opposite direction, as a result of which the driver of the lorry succumbed to injuries and sustained fracture to the right leg of the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner was suspended on 27/12/1995 and later an enquiry was concluded and removed the petitioner from service on 19/6/1996. Assailing the removal order dtd. 19/6/1996, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager, Tirupati and the same was rejected on 2/9/1996. As against the said order, the petitioner filed a Review before the 3rd respondent, who partly allowed and reverted to the post of Helper and posted to Puttur Depot. The petitioner joined duty as Helper, in the meantime C.C.No.397 of 1995 was ended in acquittal as per Judgment dtd. 1/8/1998.
(3.) While the matter stood thus, the petitioner made a representation to the 3rd respondent to reconsider his case to the post of driver in view of criminal case ended in acquittal, which was rejected on 29/5/1999, though the petitioner was reverted to the post of Helper, but the respondent corporation has utilized him as a driver and paying the scale of helper only. While the petitioner was working as Helper, he was retired from service on 31/7/2010. Since the Criminal case ended in acquittal the petitioner is entitled to receive retirement benefits. Therefore the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent with request to consider his case for paying the retirement benefits treating his services as Driver, so far no action taken by the respondents. Therefore the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 31429 of 2014 and this Court passed an order dtd. 20/10/2014 directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within two months. In compliance of the same the 1st respondent passed an erroneous order dtd. 24/1/2015 vide proceedings No. GC1/19/2014-PO-1, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence this writ petition is filed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.