APHC010454572018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21220/2018 Between: P. Umakanth, ...PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J SESHAGIRI RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SANISETTY VENKATESWARLU SC For APSRTC The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ .... to issue a Writ order or directions more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the petitioner services w.e.f.1.1.2010 as illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same and further direct the respondents to regularize the petitioner services w.e.f.1.1.2010 instead of 1.1.2011 with all consequential benefits including payment of arrears on re fixed pay.” 2. The case of the Petitioner, in brief, is as follows: i) Petitioner was appointed as Contract Driver on 24.4.2007. On the ground of unauthorised absence to the duty, vide Proceedings dated 10.03.2008, the Depot Manager, Venkatagiri Depot, terminated the services of the Petitioner. ii) The Review Petition preferred by the Petitioner was partly allowed by the Regional Manager, Nellore, vide Proceedings dated 25.06.2008 and 2 appointed the Petitioner as Contract Driver afresh. Accordingly, Petitioner was reinstated into service from the date of his appointment in the office of respondent No.2. iii) Respondent No.1-Corporation has taken a policy decision to regularise the services of the Contract Drivers who were appointed in the years, 2007, 2008 and 2009. The services of all the Contract Drivers were regulariserd with effect from 01.01.2010. iv) The grievance of the Petitioner is that though he was appointed as a Driver afresh on 25.06.2008 and worked continuously without any break upto 16.01.2009, respondents did not consider his case for regularisation of his services on the premise that he was appointed as a Contract Driver on 25.06.2008 afresh, whereas, the services of his juniors were regularised with effect from 01.01.2010. v) Petitioner made a representation dated 26.02.2018 to respondent No.1 through respondent No.2 to consider his request for regularisation of his services with effect from 01.01.2010. But till date, no orders are passed on his representation. 3. Heard Sri J.Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Sanisetty Venkateswarlu, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC appearing for respondents. Perused the material on record. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner while reiterating the case of the Petitioner, on instructions, restricted his prayer for a direction to the concerned 3 authorities of the respondent-Corporation to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 26.02.2018 and pass appropriate orders. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 6. In that view, respondent No.1 is directed to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 26.02.2018 and pass appropriate orders according to the governing rules and law, with a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 21220 of 2018 09.04.2025 Mjl /*