IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No : 4275 of 2008 Between: Garikipati Govardhanan Rao S/o. Brahmaiah R/o. Madepalli ( V ), Eluru Rural Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation rep.by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad 2 The REgional Manager, Andra pradesh State Road-Transport Corporaion, West Godavari Region, Eluru, West Godavari district. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri R.C.s.P. Ghanta for Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana Counsel for the Respondents: C.PRAKASH REDDY (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No : 4275 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in deciding to close the drinking water block and to establish beauty parlour in its place at new bus station complex, Eluru in pursuance of tender notification dated 14.02.2008 issued by respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. A perusal of the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition shows that the petitioner claims to be a regular traveller using the bus station complex at Eluru and utilizing the drinking water facility existing there. The only grievance of the petitioner is that by the impugned notification, the respondents are seeking to use the area where the drinking water facility is made available for establishment of beauty parlour. Sri C. Prakash Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the APSRTC, on instructions, submitted that only a part of the drinking water area is proposed to be converted for beauty parlour and that the Corporation will continue to provide adequate space for making available the amenity of supply of drinking water to the passengers. In view of the statement given by the learned Standing Counsel, the writ petition is disposed of. Liberty is, however, given to the petitioner to move this Court, if the Corporation does not continue to supply drinking water at the bus station. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.5572 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 29.02.2008 ES