Writ Petition No. 5041 of 2011 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 01 Mar 2011
- Bench
- NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
Outcome
Allowed
Following the same, the Writ Petition is allowed and it is also
Judgment
basis. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that while issuing orders of re-engagement, the respondents did not extend the benefit of continuity of service. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Identical issue was dealt with by this Court in W.P. No. 8090 of
Operative part
2010. Through order, dated 12.04.2010, this Court held that the contractual employees, who are re-engaged on the orders of removal being set aside, are entitled to the benefit of past service. Following the same, the Writ Petition is allowed and it is also directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of the service between the date of termination and the date of re- engagement, only for purposes of regularization. However, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any monetary benefits on account of the said benefit. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 1st March 2011
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Following the same, the Writ Petition is allowed and it is also
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 01 Mar 2011. The bench was NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.