HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR
W.P. No. 2899 of 2012
S. Jagan Reddy .. Petitioner
and another .. Respondents
O R D E R:-
The petitioner was appointed as Driver on contract basis on 18.02.2009 through a regular selection process. Alleging that he was absent from his duties from 04.11.2009 to 19.11.2009, he was terminated from service. Later on, he preferred an appeal before the Divisional Manager, but the same was rejected on 29.11.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a review before the
1st respondent, who considered his case, however, ordered re-engagement afresh.
Sri C.Sunil Kumar, learned standing counsel for the respondents submits that the period during which the petitioner was absent from duty should be deleted from counting the total period of his service, so that the other employees who have been regularly working without any absenteeism will not be placed below the petitioner in preparing the seniority list.
It appears that there is force in the contention of the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties, following the judgment of this Court in W.P. No. 12325 of 2011 dated 27.04.2011, the writ petition is allowed holding that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of continuity of service between the date of termination and the date of re-engagement only for the purpose of regularization. However, he shall not be entitled to any monetary or other benefits in pursuance of this order. Though the benefit of continuity of service between the period of termination and re-engagement should be given to the petitioner, but the actual period of absenteeism i.e. days on which the petitioner was absent should be deducted from the total number of working days put up by the petitioner, while preparing the seniority list. No order as to costs.
As a sequel to the disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P. No. 3640 of 2012 filed by the petitioner seeking interim direction is disposed of as infructuous.
B. CHANDRA KUMAR,J