APHC010451572013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 12058/2013 Between: 1. B. BALAYYA, C-70207, CONTRACT DRIVER,, S/O. SATYANARAYANA, 32 YRS, VISAKHAPATNAM DEPOT, R/O. NAKKAVANIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE A P S R T C, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MUSHEERABAD, HYDERABAD. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER A P S R T C, VISAKHAPATNAM REGION, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST 3. THE DEPOT MANAGER A P S R T C, VISAKHAPANTAM DEPOT, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. ...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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner on par with his colleagues as high handed and arbitrary action, contrary to APSRTC Regulations, contrary to the circular instructions and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to the respondents to extend all the benefits on par with the colleagues of the petitioner including regularization w.e.f 1-10-2010 and to pay the arrears of difference of wages forthwith and pass. 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 14912 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 respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner on par with his colleagues forthwith pending disposal of the W. P, and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S M SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVASA PRASAD SC For APSRTC The Court made the following: 3 Order:- This writ petition was filed challenging the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner on par with his colleagues. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner is continuing in service and, as such, the grievance of the petitioner has been adequately addressed by the respondents. 3. Recording the same, this writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 29.01.2026 PNS