THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.24480 of 2004 Dated 13-12-2005 Between: M. Nagaraja Naidu, and another. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Regional Transport Authority, represented by its Secretary, Chittoor, and two others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.24480 of 2004 O R D E R: The petitioners as well as the respondents 2 and 3 are operating stage carriages on the town service route from Madanapalli to Chowdeapalli via Boyakonda. It appears that all of them made separate applications before the first respondent-Regional Transport Authority, wherein some of them requested for increase of trips and some others sought for revision of timings. The first respondent, having considered the requests of all of the operators, and having held a conference on 09-09-2004 passed the order dated 16-12-2004 revising the timings and increasing the trips initially fixed. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition contending inter alia that the first respondent erred in revising the timings without issuing any notice to the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners raised various contentions stating that the timings as fixed under the impugned order are not in the interests of the petitioners, and therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. At the outset it is to be noted that against the impugned order dated 16-12-2004 passed by the first respondent, a revision is maintainable before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submits that as a matter of fact the second respondent has already preferred such a revision and the same is pending before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the petitioners to prefer a revision as provided under the statute against the order dated 16-12-2004 within a period of four weeks from today. If any such revision is filed, the same shall be considered and decided along with the revision filed by the second respondent, which is pending, and appropriate orders be passed in accordance with law. No costs. _____________ (G. ROHINI, J) Date:13-12-2005 ghn