THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.20136 of 2011 Dated:19.07.2011 Between: Sri Dama Venkateswarlu. … Petitio And The Transport Commissioner, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, And others. ... Responde THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.20136 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner, statedly an agriculture labourer of Kondapi Village, the instant writ petition invoking our Public Interest Litigation jurisdiction seek inter alia, a direction to the respondents to restore bus service 12-30 Kon Night Out Service for the convenience of Kattubadipalem Villagers. In a nutshell, it is the case of the petitioner that till recently the And Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), represented respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 herein, used to run a bus service from Kondap Tanguturu at 7:45 am and 8:00 am, and again at 5:00 pm and 2:45 pm. same was cancelled. Petitioner alleges that the fourth respondent influenced by the auto operators by offering bribe which resulted in withdrawal of the bus service. The petitioner also alleges that, due to sudden withdrawal of the bus service, villagers are facing problems of mobili go to Tanguturu and other places. We have heard the Counsel for the petitioner. It is brought to our no that when the former Sarpanch made a complaint in February, 2008, to Hon’ble Chief Minister seeking redressal with regard to the withdrawal of service, the Vice Chairman and the Managing Director of APSRTC responded stating that the matter was being looked into by the Regi Manager. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, the bus service was resto which has again been withdrawn at the behest of the auto operators. Transport service provided by APSRTC is a public utility. APSRTC i is a statutory body under the State Transport Corporations Act, 1958. The Act, and the rules and regulations made thereunder, require the APSRTC provide user friendly bus services. It does not, however, mean that the APSR can be compelled to run such services which are not financially viable logistically inoperable. These are matters for the APSRTC to decide ha regard to various factors like passenger traffic, availability of buses, availabili staff for running the buses and financial constraints. In our considered opin in a petition seeking judicial review, these matters cannot be gone into. E according to the petitioner, when the bus was withdrawn in February 2008 Sarpanch had addressed the Hon’ble Chief Minister, who had forwarded complaint to the Vice Chairman and Managing Director of APSRTC, thereafter the bus service was restored. Having regard to the past experie nothing prevents the petitioner to make a representation, if not already mad is brought to our notice that as many as twelve villagers have sen representation on 25.04.2011 to the first respondent. They may also sen similar representation to the second respondent for necessary redressal. Ex making this observation, we are not inclined to pass any order in this petition. The writ petition, with the above observation, is accordingly dismis without any order as to costs. _____________ (V.V.S. RAO ____________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN 19.07.2011 vs