IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 16140 of 2000 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....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 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ } ORAL ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that necessary sanction under Section 68 (3) (ca) of the Motor Vehicles Act has not been accorded by the second respondent despite the first respondent having so requested vide letter dated 10-03-2000. It is not for this Court to issue a mandamus to the second respondent to vary the route as these are all matters in the executive realm and not for this Court to determine. Suffice to hold that, in case the recommendations of the first respondent have not been examined by the second respondent till date, the second respondent shall do so and take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. _______________ 28th August, 2008 SKM