COMMON JUDGMENT

A.V.Ravindra Babu, J. - Both these Intra Court Appeals are under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, in view of the order of the learned single Judge, dated 28.10.2022, in Writ Petition No.2345 of 2019.

2. Challenge in Writ Appeal No.433 of 2023 is by the appellants viz., the Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), Guntur-I Depot, Guntur and the Regional Manager, APSRTC, Guntur to the order, dated 28.10.2022, in Writ Petition No.2345 of 2019 of the learned single Judge insofar as setting-aside the Award, dated 09.12.2005, in Industrial Dispute No.12 of 2010 of the Labour Court relating to denial of back wages is concerned and challenge in Writ Appeal No.539 of 2023 is to the above said order of the learned single Judge by the appellant/writ petitioner viz., P. Showreelu insofar as allowing back wages from the date of his reinstatement into service instead of from the date of his termination of service.

3. The parties to these Writ Appeals will hereinafter be referred to as described before the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.2345 of 2019, for the sake of convenience.

4. Brief facts leading to filing of Writ Petition No.2345 of 2019 by the petitioner, in substance, are that the petitioner joined as a Driver in APSRTC in 1997 and worked as such up to 10.12.2008. While the petitioner was working in the 1st respondent Depot, he was issued a charge sheet, dated 11.12.2008, alleging that when he was performing his duty in the APSRTC Bus bearing registration No.AP-28-Z-1473 on the route Guntur to Amaravathi on 01.12.2008, an Auto bearing registration No.AP-7W-2074, coming in opposite direction, dashed the bus driven by the petitioner at about 11:30 p.m. as a consequence of which, death of 3 passengers traveling in the auto occurred on the spot and further other passengers received injuries. The accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner and he was responsible for the damage caused to the bus, which constitutes misconduct under Regulation 28 of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. To the aforesaid charge sheet, the petitioner made his explanation denying the charge leveled against him. Accordingly, a domestic enquiry was conducted. Basing on the erroneous findings of the Enquiry Officer, he was removed from service vide order, dated 29.04.2009, of the first respondent. When petitioner approached his superior authorities by way of Appeal as well as a petition for Review, they were rejected, on merits. Hence, the petitioner was compelled to raise an Industrial Dispute viz., ID No.12 of 2010 before the Labour Court, Guntur. The Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Guntur on comprehensive adjudication of the dispute, passed an order on 09.12.2005, by partly allowing the same with a direction to the respondents therein to reinstate the petitioner giving continuity of service but with a finding that the petitioner is not entitled for back wages and attendant benefits. Pursuant to the Award of the Labour Court, petitioner was reinstated into service but without back wages. When the misconduct leveled against him was not proved, denial of granting of back wages is nothing but illegal and contrary to the settled legal principles. Hence, the petitioner, felt aggrieved of the aforesaid Award of the Labour Court, insofar as denying back wages to him, filed the Writ Petition so as to give a direction to the respondents to grant him back wages from the date of his termination of service.

5. The respondents/APSRTC, in the aforesaid Writ Petition, got filed a counter resisting the claim of the petitioner and denying the averments in the Writ Petition. They put forth a contention, in substance, that due to the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner, which occurred on 01.12.2008, 3 passengers travelling in the auto died on the spot and 3 other passengers died at the hospital and other passengers in the auto received injuries. There was also damage caused t