E.Mahesh v. The APSRTC

The writ petitioner is engaged on contract basis as a driver in APSRTC during the month of April, 2007. He was attached to the depot at Kurnool. Unfortunately his father died and hence he could not attend the duties between 18-4-2008 to 3-5-2008. Treating the said period as unauthorised absence and without providing any opportunity or conducting any enquiry for his absence, his services have been terminated, by an order passed on 3-5-2008. The petitioner has appealed to the Regional Manager, Kurnool against the orders of Depot Manager. Accordingly the Regional Manager considered his appeal and allowed his appeal. While allowing his appeal, the Regional Manager has posted him to the Hyderabad region. The petitioner points out that as a driver on contract basis, he is not being paid regular salary and it is difficult for him to work at a far of place like Hyderabad and survive. He therefore, prayed that he may be retained in the Kurnool region, as there are vacancies, in that region.

The learned counsel Ms. K.Swapna Madhu submits that once the appellate authority has noticed that there is justifiable reason for the writ petitioner to abstain from duty due to the sudden demise of his father, is not justified in posting him to a far off depot. The learned counsel would further submit that no opportunity was provided by the Depot Manager to the petitioner to establish the justifiable reason for his absence, inasmuch as there is no facility of availing Casual Leave for drivers on contract basis, even in case of emergency. Further the drivers on contract basis are not extended the benefits that are otherwise extended to drivers on regular basis. They deserve compassionate consideration to be retained in the same depot. All the more so, as several vacancies are existing in Kurnool depot. Per contra, the learned standing counsel Smt W.V.S.Rajeshwari would contend that there was imminent requirement of drivers at Hyderabad region and hence the appellate authority has directed the writ petitioner to report to duty at Hyderabad and the writ petitioner has not reported to duty so far.

The Corporation itself has issued instructions to all the Depot Managers not to disengage the services of drivers on contract basis without providing them an opportunity to explain the reasons or justification for their absence. When once the services of drivers are needed in Kurnool region and when once the orders of the Depot Manager are found to be prima facie unsustainable, the appellate authority perhaps is not justified in allowing the appeal of the employee concerned and instead of retaining him in the same depot transferring him to a far off place. This eventually amounts to ensuring that the employee will not derive any effective or meaningful benefit from out of the appeal being allowed. I quite see considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that drivers engaged on contract basis, having not been paid the same salary and allowances as that of a regular driver, cannot be asked to discharge the functions of drivers at a different regions/depots as they may not be able to fend for themselves properly, at a different place.