IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18988 of 2004 Between: 1. B.P.V.V.Srinivas Rao, S/o B. Raja Rao, 2. P.L.N. Prasad, S/o P. Rama Rao, 3. D. Uma Maheshwar Rao, S/o. B.Chitti Babu, All are unemployees and residents of Vizianagaram Town, Vizianagaram District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, APSRTC,Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3. The Divisional Manager, APSRTC, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the petitioners are entitled for absorption in suitable posts, as displaced employees of the private buses bearing No. APV 9869, No. ADN 3967 and No. AAV 1347, which were plying on the route Vizianagaram to Shikaru Ganji as per additional guidelines No.3 dt. 7-5-1988 and direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners in suitable posts with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.M.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:Ms.B.G.UMA DEVI (S.C. for A.P.S.R.T.C.) The Court at the stage of admission made the following : THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU Writ Petition No. 18988 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioners claim that they are displaced employees of the private buses, which were plying on the nationalised routes, which took place in 1986. After 18 years, they approached this Court, through this writ petition, seeking a direction to the respondents to absorb them into suitable posts as displaced employees of private buses by virtue of the Circular dated 10.11.1983 and Guideline No.3 of additional guidelines dated 07.05.1988. 2. The petitioners approached this Court at a very belated stage. There are laches on their part in approaching the Court. Hence, the writ petition cannot be maintained. However, the petitioners are at liberty to make a representation to the respondents and the respondents may consider the said representation about their request for absorption into suitable posts and pass appropriate orders according to Law. 3. With the above directions, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. The dismissal of this writ petition may not come in the way of the respondents to pass appropriate orders. _______________________ Dr.G.YETHIRAJULU, J Date: 14th October, 2004. Cs ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Vice Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3. The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 4. Two C.D. copies.