Libertatem Magazine

Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Writ Petition as It Finds No Irregularities in Order of Reinstatement Passed by Labour Court

Contents of this Page


A single-judge Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Battu Devananda gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner corporation. The petition was filed to issue an appropriate order in the nature of a writ of certiorari declaring the award made in I.D. No. 59 of 2009 by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labor court as illegal and arbitrary. 


In this case, Respondent No.1 was appointed as the driver in APSRTC in the year 1992. While he was driving the bus on 07.08.2007 on route Yemmiganur to Hyderabad a fatal accident happened with a four-wheeler auto. The auto driver and the cleaner of the auto received who got into the accident suffered grievous injuries due to which they died on the spot. Charges were levied on the Respondent and justifying the same he mentioned that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry with a heavy focus on lights. In order to avoid the accident, he swerved the bus to the left side and the auto which was stationed for repairs without any signal touched the bus. A charge sheet was filed and displeased with the reply an enquiry was ordered and after going through the entire material the charges were proved. The Respondent was finally removed from the service. An appeal I.D. NO. 59 OF 2009 was filed before the industrial tribunal-cum-labor authority. An order was passed by the said authority setting aside the removal and other orders of the appellate and review authorities directing the Petitioner to reinstate the Respondent into service. However, the Respondent was not entitled to back-wages due to the well-settled principles of “no work no pay”. Aggrieved by the order of reinstatement, a writ petition is filed by the Petitioner corporation. 


It was pointed out that this Court had granted an interim stay of the attendant benefits only subject to the condition that the workman be reinstated into service. 

The learned counsel for Respondent No. 1 submitted that in compliance with the order of the labour court, the Petitioner reinstated him into service and is presently performing his duties as a driver.

Court’s Analysis

On the basis of the material provided, it is noted that in order to avoid the accident with the lorry coming from the opposite direction, & to save the bus and the passengers, the Respondent turned the bus to the left side. At that time, the auto stationed on the road and undergoing repair came in contact with the bus due to the absence of any signals. It is seen that the auto driver has not taken the required steps to avoid accidents. The Labour Court after considering all the material and the issues came to the conclusion that the punishment imposed was not right and set aside the orders of the petitioner. The circumstances of the case show that the decision of the Labour Court was correct and not illegal. 

Court’s Decision

The Court held that the reasons provided by the labour Court while setting aside the removal orders, and the orders of the appellate and review authorities while directing the Petitioner to reinstate the Respondent back to service, are correct and contain no procedural irregularities or illegalities. Therefore, the Court sees no reason to interfere with the order passed by the labour court. The writ petition is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs & any pending application shall also be closed.

Click here to view the Order. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author