APHC010394052013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 16837/2013 Between: 1. SH. HUSSAIN, S/O. S.A. RASOOL,, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, E.NO.403625, R/O. 26/87, ATMAKUR, KOTHAPET STREET, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE REGIONAL MANAGER APSRTC, KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.. 2. THE DEPOT MANAGER APSRTC ATMAKUR BUS DEPOT, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ order or direction more particular one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent is not considering the case of petitioner for providing the alternative employment consequent of the proceedings dated 8.10.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent as the same is illegal arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to provide alternate employment to the petitioner and also direct respondent to pay the salary with effect from 8.8.2008, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 20424 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to provide alternate employment to any suitable post pending disposal of writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 2 OF 2013(WPMP 20425 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's case in pursuance of the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2012 pending disposal of writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: 3 Order:- The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for alternative employment. The petitioner was engaged as a driver and caused an accident on 08.08.2008. On account of the said accident, the petitioner was referred for medical check-up and he was declared unfit for A-1 category driver. 2. Thereafter, a 2nd opinion was sought from A.P.S.R.T.C. Hospital, Tarnaka. The Superintendent of Tarnaka Hospital issued another certificate dated 17.09.2009 finding the petitioner unfit for A-1 category driver post. Thereafter, the petitioner was retired vide proceedings dated 08.10.2009. The petitioner requested the respondent authorities for grant of an alternative post by invoking the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act. 3. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, directed the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, to provide alternative employment to the petitioner within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 4. The respondents in their counter have stated that in pursuance of the interim orders passed by this Court, the respondents have reinstated the petitioner as a Shramik and he was called upon to join duty vide proceedings 4 dated 20.12.2013. Thereafter, while the writ petition was pending before this Court, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation. 5. Considering the averments in the counter that the grievance of the petitioner has been adequately addressed by the respondents. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed, making it clear to the respondents to release all service benefits, if not already released, to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 10.03.2026 PNS