G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) AS in both the cases common question of law is involved since both the writ petitioners are disposed by a common order.

( 2 ) THE Petitioners are challenging the circular issued by the APSRTC (for short Corporation) issuing No. LCI /402 (16)/ dated 6-1-1990 including the deductions of notional increment already awarded to the petitioners and for consequential fixation of pay taking into account the lost notional increment and for releasing the physical monetary benefits from the date of award became enforceable.

( 3 ) FOR proper appreciation of the facts, I will narrate the facts submitted in WP No. 11182/92. The petitioner was working as a conductor in the Corporation at Sircilla Depot and subsequently his services were terminated. Aggrieved by the said termination order the petitioner raised an Industrial Dispute and the same was referred by the Government for adjudication in the following terms: 1. Whether the Depot Manager, Karimnagar is justified in removing Sri N. Raja Reddy, Ex-Conductor from service 2. If not, to what relief he is entitled the tribunal passed an award in JD No. 322/ 86 on 6-11-1987 directing the Respondent to reinstate the workman with continuity of service, but without back wages. In pursuance of the said directions, the petitioner was admitted into duty on 11-7-1988. Subsequently he was promoted as A. D. C. The petitioner submits that his pay was also fixed taking into account the notional increments, as he was directed to be reinstated into service. By the impugned circular dated 6-1-1990 instructions were issued that if notional increments were already released to the petitioner, the same are sought to be recovered as his pay is sought to be fixed in accordance with the said circular which has the effect of reducing the basic pay and also the allowances and other benefits. Therefore, the petitioner impugnes the Circular dated 6-1-1990.

( 4 ) COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT was filed on behalf of the Respondent contending that the petitioner is not entitled for notional increments, as the award is only for reinstatement without back-wages. There is no specific relief in the award slating that he is entitled for continuity of service and other benefits. In the absence of such a relief, the petitioner is not entitled for notional increments.

( 5 ) IN the Memo issued by the Managing Director of the Corporation to the Accounts Officer concerned, it is mentioned that since the employee has been reinstated without back wages and there is no mention for the attendant benefits in the award, the last pay drawn by the employee on the date of removal should be fixed and his pay, on his retirement. It was further directed that if there any Revision of Pay Scales, the last pay drawn by the employee should be fixed at the appropriate stage in the revised scales without adding any notional increments. However, for the purpose of seniority and terminal benefits the interrugnum period shall be treated as continuous service.

( 6 ) IT is not in dispute that the Labour Court passed an award directing reinstatement of the petitioner. The word reinstatement has been interpreted in number of cases to mean that the workman is restored back to his position. But, however the Labour Court has not granted any backwages. It has therefore, to be construed that he is deemed to have been continued in service, but without any monetary benefits till the date of award became enforceable. The effect of award of re-instatement is that the dismissal of workman is no more in operation and that he is deemed to have been restored to his former position and status as if contract of employment originally entered into has been continuing. There is material difference between re-instatement and re-employment. In the former case the workman is deemed to be in service without interruption, while in the latter case, he forfeits his previous service and enters employment as a fresher. Therefore, the relief of re-instatement granted to the employee has to be necessarily treated, as if he has continued in service, with all the benefits of wages, increments and revision of pay scales etc. , but for the illegal termination effected by the employer. Since back-wages have not been allowed by the Labour Court, the monetary benefit that would have accrued to the work-man from the date of termination till the date of re-instatement would not be available for him. But, however, wages ought to be nationality fixed shall be continued on the date of re-instatement and the actual benefits should be released from the said date. Hence, fixation of pay of the employee on his re-instatement at the stage, where the employee was placed at the lime of dismissal and then allowing him the pay fixation would be contrary to the spirit of the Award. The very meaning given to the word reinstatement would be frustrated if such an interpretation is sought to be made by the employer.

( 7 ) I find that the Corporation has not properly construed the meaning given to the work re-instatement while treating the period as continuous for The purpose of seniority and terminal benefits, there is no reason why the same period should not be treated for the purpose of pay-fixation notionally. But for the words re-instatement without back-wages, the petitioner could have got all the benefits of fixation arrears of wages and other benefits. Therefore, the impugned proceedings are arbitrary and illegal.

( 8 ) THE learned Counsel for the Corporation again placed a circular issued by the Corporation dated: 18-12-1981 wherein the Corporation considered the implementation of the Awards where re-instatement was awarded without back-wages. The seven guide-lines contained in the said circular are extracted below: 1. In case where an employee is directed to be re-instated with continuity of service and attendant benefits but without back-wages the salary of the employee shall be refixed by giving notional increments. He shall not be paid back-wages for the period when he was not on duty. 2. Attendant benefits does not include giving uniform or chappal allowance for the period the employee was not in service (was not on duly) 3. Leave is earned by duty only. Continuity of service given for some limited purpose in the award cannot be construed as if the employee performed duties attached to the post. The period during which the employee was out of service does not earn any leave. As such, this not on duty period shall not be considered for computing earned leave. 4. The employee is not entitled to payment of ex-gratia during the period he was out of service (unless the conditions laid down in the circular governing the eligibility and payment of ex-gratia are complied with ). 5. House Rent allowance and City Compensatory Allowance shall not be paid as they are included in the definition of wages as defined in Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and therefore, do not come under the purview of attendant benefits. 6. In regard to promotion to higher post purely on the basis of seniority, notional promotion can be given to the employee, if he is not otherwise found unsuitable. 7. In case of promotion to selection post, he can be considered by Selection Committee in future vacancy only.

( 9 ) A perusal of the said guide-lines would clearly reveal that proper interpretation has been given to the word !re-instatement. That moreover, the phrase re-instatement with continuity of service would not go together as re-instatement itself implies continuity of service. Therefore, as per Guideline No. 1 the salary of the employee is directed to be re-fixed without back-wages, by giving notional increments. Even promotion was directed to be given to the employee notionally. This circular shall have over-riding effect on the communication No. LC 1/402 (16)/ 90 dated 6-1-1990 issued by the Managing Director of the Corporation.

( 10 ) UNDER these circumstances and in view of the Circular No. PD-67/1981-82, dated 18-12-1981, I allow both the writ petitions No. 11182/92 and 11186/92 and quash the impugned order No. LCl/402 (16)/90 dated 6-1-1990. I make it clear that the employees in both the writ petitions are entitle for the continuity of service and also notional increments for the purpose of fixation of pay, including all other benefits as stipulated in the circular No. PD-67/1981-82, dated 18-12-1981. No costs.