APHC010651862013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 13268/2013 Between: 1. K. RAMANAIAH, NELLORE DIST., OCC: DRIVER, E.NO.514042, R/O.DARBALAMETTA VILLAGE, NIDUGUNTAPALEM POST, VENKATACHALAM MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE A P S R T C REP BY VC MD HYDERABAD 2 OTRS, REP. BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, BUS BHAVGAN, MUSHEERABAD, HYDEABAD. 2. THE A P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, NELLORE REGION, REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, NELLORE. 3. THE A P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, NELLORE-I DEPOT, REP. BY ITS DEPOT MANAGER, NELLORE. ...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 a writ or order, orders or directions more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus - i) declaring the action of the respondents- corporation in compelling the petitioner to perform dual job of Conductor and Driver with Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM) service and not allotting district service chart to the petitioner instead of TIM service as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, unfair labour practice, contrary to the service regulations, violative of the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and the AP Motor 2 Vehicles Rules, 1989 and violative of the ratio laid down in order dt.30.01.2011 passed in WP No.29625/2011 besides violative of Art.14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of India; and ii) consequently, direct 2nd & 3rd respondents not to insist the petitioner to perform the dual job of Driver and Conductors in Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM) service and allow them to perform duties of Driver with conductor in district service chart; IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 16292 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 2nd & 3rd respondents not to allot dual duties of Driver and Conductor to the petitioner in Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM) service duly following the ratio laid down in order dt. 30.01.2011 passed in W.P. No. 29625/ 2011. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P DURGA PRASAD SC FOR APSRTC The Court made the following: 3 Order:- The petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent-Corporation in compelling the petitioner to perform the dual job of conductor and driver by operating the Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM). 2. It is submitted that the same amounts to unfair labour practice and is contrary to the service conditions. The petitioner was aged about 54 years when the writ petition was filed. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation submits that the petitioner retired from service on medical grounds with effect from 14.10.2015. It is submitted that on account of the petitioner retiring on medical grounds, the cause in the writ petition would not survive. It is also submitted that the issue of operating the Ticket Issuing Machine by the drivers was not mandatory and it was optional. 4. Recording the same, no further orders are required in the writ petition. 5. Accordingly, 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 31.03.2026 PNS 4