IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26879 of 1999 Between: 1 G.V.Rangaiah, S/o Balasangaiah, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kanigiri Depot, Kanigiri, Prakasam District. 2 D.Chennaiah, S/o Chennaiah, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kanigiri Depot, Kanigiri, Prakasam District. 3 K.Umamaheswara Rao, S/o Alluraiah, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kanigiri Depot, Kanigiri, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Prakasam Region, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kanigiri Depot, Kanigiri, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the order dt. 13.12.1996 in No.P1/876(12)/96-KNG, issued by the 3rd Respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the same Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.MALLIK Counsel for the Respondents: MR.C.PRAKASH REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioners who are working as Conductors in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation have questioned regularization orders dated 13-12-1996 passed by the 3rd respondent – Depot Manager in proceedings No.P1/876(12)/96-KNG. It is stated that on an earlier occasion, the petitioners along with some others had approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 4276 of 1996 seeking directions for regularization of their services from the date of their initial appointment. Following the judgment of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 705 of 1995, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents therein to regularize the services of the petitioners in the posts of Conductor reckoning their continuous service as envisaged under Section 25- B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘the Act’). Earlier to the impugned proceedings dated 13-12- 1996, orders were passed regularizing the services of the petitioners with eﬀect from 01-01-1986. But, however while implementing the directions of this Court in the said writ petition, revised date was ordered so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned as 23- 11-1985 and with regard to petitioners 1 and 3 same dates were maintained inasmuch as their regularization is before the expiry of 240 days period of service. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are entitled for regularization from the initial date of their appointment. The request of the petitioners had already been negatived by this Court in Writ Petition No. 4276 of 1996 and as the said order has become ﬁnal, it is not open for the petitioners to seek the very same relief. In any event, the respondents have issued proceedings dated 13-12-1996 by revising the date so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned and earlier dates of regularization were maintained so far as petitioners 1 and 3 are concerned as the said dates are beneﬁcial for them because their regularization was ordered before 240 days as contemplated under Section 25-B(2)(a) of the Act. In that view of the matter, I do not ﬁnd any illegality in the impugned order so as to set aside the same and grant further directions to regularize the services of the petitioners from the initial date of their appointment. The writ petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. R.SUBHASH REDDY, J Dated: 11-09-2008 ks ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Prakasam Region, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kanigiri Depot, Kanigiri, Prakasam District. 4 2CD copies