The facts leading to the present appeal are as under That the respondent hereinoriginal writ petitioner was appointed as a companytract driver and working with the appellant companyporation.
After the reengagement, the respondent invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed for companytinuity of service together companysequential service benefit.
Though on behalf of the Corporation an effort was made to distinguish the earlier decision on the ground that in the present case after fullfledged enquiry has been held, this distinction did number find acceptance by the learned Single Judge.
The learned Single Judge allowed the petition, holding that the matter was number res integra and was companyered by an earlier judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 29.02.2012 in Writ Petition No.2786 of 2012.
After the dismissal of the departmental appeal, and in the companyrse of the departmental review, the Divisional Manager issued an order for the reengagement of the respondent on companytract on 06.07.2012.
In the present case, a disciplinary enquiry was held against the workman after which an initial decision was taken to terminate him from service.
This was, however, without any monetary benefit and was directed to companynt only for regularisation.
Neither the termination number the order granting him fresh appointment as a companytract driver were challenged.
On the companytrary, it was held that in the previous case, the learned Judge had found that the enquiry was number in keeping with the principles of natural justice.
That a departmental enquiry was initiated against him for remaining on unauthorized absence.
In a departmental review, he was granted fresh appointment.
It is the above order of the learned Single Judge which was affirmed by the Division Bench in a Writ Appeal.
R.SHAH, J. Leave granted.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 11.06.2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No.864 of 2013 by which the Division Bench dismissed the same appeal and companyfirmed judgment passed by Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by R NATARAJAN Date 2019.01.25 164829 IST the learned Single Judge dated 18.07.2012 in Writ Petition Reason No.17541 of 2012 directing the appellants hereinoriginal respondents to extend the benefit of companytinuity of service to the workman from the date of termination till the date of re engagement except for the period when he was absent and that would be without monetary benefit and that it would be granted only for the purpose of regularization at a later date, the original respondents Corporationemployer have preferred the present appeal.
