IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 7676 of 2005 Between: 1 K.Niranjan, s/o Narayanji, r/o Velgonda, Midjil (M), Mahabubnagar District. 2 B.Chandrasekhar Reddy, s/o Hanumantha Reddy, r/o Konkuntla (V), Devakadu (M), Mahabubnagar District. 3 M.Yadaiah, s/o Janga, r/o Vattem Village, Bijnipally (M), Nagarkurnool (Tq.) Mahabubnagar District. 4 T.Seshi Reddy, s/o Rangareddy, r/o Karukonda, Nawabpet Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 5 B.Khaja Pasha, s/o Samad, r/o RTC Colony, Achampet, Mahabubnagar District. 6 S.Srinivasulu, s/o Ramulu, r/o Gaddampally Village, Telkapally (M), Mahaububnagar District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Region, JBS, Picket, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the action of the respondent in not considering the petitioner's candidature to the post of Driver Grade II in Hyderabad City Region and cancelling/deleting the petitioner's name from the selected candidates list of Driver post on the ground that the petitioners did not respondent to the call on news paper to work in October/November, 2001 as bad, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent to appoint the petitioners as Driver Grade II on par with their juniors in the selection list. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD The Court, at the admission stage, made the following : ORAL ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation. In this matter, it is represented by either side that the question involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order, dated 1.11.2004 passed by this Court in W.P.No.19873 of 2004. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of following the order passed in W.P.No.19873 of 2004. Therefore, the respondent is directed to examine the case of the petitioners also for appointment irrespective of the fact that they failed to attend to their duties during the strike period in pursuance of the paper notification given by the respondent and pass appropriate orders regarding their request for appointment in pursuance of the selection made in 2001, within two months’ time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to mention that the impugned order shall stand set aside and it is open for the respondent to consider their case afresh as directed above. No costs. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J.) 7th April, 2005 bcj To 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Region, JBS, Picket, Secunderabad. 2 Two C.D. copies Note: Furnish copy in three days B/o bcj