Respondent Corporation is companystituted and incorporated under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 64 of 1950 .
1114 of 2004 was allowed by a judgment and order dated 13.2.2007 in terms whereof the matter was remitted to the High Court for disposal of the case on merit.
However, he was number paid his salary at par with his companyleagues whose services had been regularized with effect from 1.10.1983.
A writ appeal was preferred thereagainst by the respondent herein.
Pursuant to or in furtherance of the said Award, appellant was reinstated in service.
He filed an Execution Petition being E.P. No.
He was placed under suspension in the year 1982.
However, the said writ appeal was barred by limitation and an application for companydonation of delay having number been allowed, the same was dismissed.
By reason of an Award dated 1.8.1988, the Labour Court directed his reinstatement in service with companytinuity therein but without attendant benefits and back wages.
As despite the same, his pay was number fixed at par with his companyleagues and numbernotional increments had been granted, a legal numberice was issued on his behalf by an Advocate on 2.3.1992.
581 of 1987 before Labour Court, Hyderabad praying that his services be directed to be regularized at par with his companyleagues with effect from 1.10.1983.
21410 of 2002 praying for grant of numberional increments for the period between 1.10.1983 and 15.2.1989.
P. Nageswara Rao.
In the said disciplinary proceeding, he, having been found guilty was dismissed from services.
18 of 1989 in I.D. No.
A Special Leave Petition filed thereagainst being Special Leave Petition Civil No.
A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him.
The award appeared to have been passed by the labour companyrt on companysent of the parties.
B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
An industrial dispute was raised by him, which was eventually referred to the Labour Court by the State of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of its powers companyferred upon it under Section 10 1 c of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for short, the Act .
Appellant is before us questioning the judgment and order dated 21.9.2007 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No.658 of 2007 and others whereby and whereunder the said writ appeal preferred from a judgment and order dated 29.10.2002 passed in W.P. No.
By reason of the impugned judgment, the writ appeal preferred by the respondent herein has been allowed.
21410 of 2002 filed by appellant and others was allowed.
He thereafter filed a writ petition before the High Court which was marked as Writ Petition No.
By reason of a judgment and order dated 29.10.2002, the said writ petition was allowed by a learned single judge of the High Court, directing The companytroversy in this writ petition is numbermore res integra, in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in APSRTC, Khammam Region and another Vs.
Appellant joined its services as a companyductor in the year 1981.
