Employment Continuity and Service Regularization: Supreme Court’s Decision in APSRTC Case

The case of APSRTC & ORS. vs. Sri K. Sathaiah revolves around employment continuity and service regularization. This case was heard in the Supreme Court of India under Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, with the appeal arising from Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 7807 of 2014. The appeal was filed by APSRTC (Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation) against the respondent, Sri K. Sathaiah, challenging the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

The legal battle began when Sri K. Sathaiah, who was appointed as a contract driver, faced termination due to unauthorized absence. After an unsuccessful departmental appeal and review, he was later re-engaged as a contract employee. He then approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking continuity of service with consequential benefits.

Background of the Case

The respondent, Sri K. Sathaiah, was engaged as a contract driver with APSRTC. However, his services were terminated after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of remaining absent without authorization. Upon review, the Divisional Manager reinstated him as a contract driver, following which he sought judicial intervention to claim continuity of service benefits.

Judgment by the High Court

The learned Single Judge of the High Court ruled in favor of the respondent, citing an earlier decision (W.P. No. 2786 of 2012), which had a similar context. The Court directed APSRTC to provide continuity of service to the respondent from the date of termination to re-engagement, except for the period he was absent, and that it would count only for regularization, without monetary benefits.

Appeal to the Supreme Court

APSRTC, dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision, filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, contending that:

• The High Court erred in granting continuity of service without setting aside the termination order.
• The case was wrongly linked to an earlier judgment, ignoring its individual facts.
• Granting service continuity to an employee found guilty of misconduct would place him on equal footing with those having unblemished records.

Supreme Court’s Observations and Verdict

The Supreme Court, comprising Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, examined the case and found substantial merit in APSRTC’s arguments. The Court observed:

“Such a direction could not have been issued by the learned Single Judge without the termination being put into question.”

It further noted that continuity of service is typically granted only when an order of termination is set aside to ensure no service hiatus. Since the respondent did not challenge his termination or the fresh appointment order, he could not claim continuity of service.

The Supreme Court also criticized the High Court for issuing a common order in multiple cases without analyzing individual circumstances. It ruled that an employee terminated due to misconduct should not receive the same benefits as those without disciplinary issues.

Based on these findings, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and ruled that the respondent’s seniority would be counted only from the date of fresh appointment.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms the importance of individual case analysis in employment disputes. It underscores that continuity of service cannot be granted unless the termination order itself is challenged and overturned. This judgment provides a crucial precedent for cases involving employment regularization and service continuity claims.

Final Verdict: The appeal was allowed, and the High Court’s judgment was set aside.

Petitioner Name: APSRTC & ORS..
Respondent Name: Sri K. Sathaiah.
Judgment By: Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Justice M.R. Shah.
Place Of Incident: Andhra Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 07-12-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: APSRTC & ORS. vs Sri K. Sathaiah Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 07-12-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Employment Disputes
See all petitions in Termination Cases
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments December 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category