THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.27954 OF 2008 Dated: 09.12.2009 Between: 1. The Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad-20., and 2 others. …. Petitioners And 1. Sd. Raheemuddin and another. …. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.27954 OF 2008 ORDER : The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation filed this writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 2nd respondent – State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities exercising jurisdiction under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - in entertaining the 1st respondent’s complaint under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short, ‘the Act’) and directing the Corporation to send the 1st respondent to State Medical Board to obtain Disability Medical Certificate as arbitrary and illegal. Heard both sides. As could be seen from the material on record, the 1st respondent who was working as a Driver in the Corporation and was retired from service on 31.03.2003 on medical grounds in terms of Section 6-A(4) of APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulations, 1964, made a complaint before the 2nd respondent in the year 2006 complaining that he was not provided with any alternative employment as provided under Section 47 of the Act. Accordingly, Case No.180 of 2006 was registered under Section 62 of the Act before the 2nd respondent and by notice dated 22.11.2008 the Corporation was directed to refer the complainant/1st respondent to the State Medical Board for the purpose of Disability Certificate observing that the complainant was retired without such Disability Certificate from a competent authority. Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation filed the present writ petition. While directing Rule Nisi, this Court by order dated 13.2.2009 in W.P.M.P.No.36633 of 2009 granted interim stay of all further proceedings in Case No.180 of 2006 on the file of the 2nd respondent. However, by that time the 2nd respondent has already passed a final order on 12.2.2009 in Case No.180 of 2006 with directions as under : “It is observed that the respondents herein have retired the individual based on the Medical Certificate issued by R.T.C. Hospital, Tarnaka who is not the competent authority to issue disability certificate. The disability certificate shall be obtained from a competent authority /Medical Board, the APSRTC shall refer the Complainant to Sarojini Devi Eye Hospital, Hyderabad i.e., State Medical Board to obtain disability certificate. In view of the above, it is ordered that the Complainant has to be referred to the State Medical Board and based on the certification of the State Medical Board, the Complainant shall be continued as Driver of APSRTC is bound to provide an alternative job as per Section 47 of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. With regard to the benefits paid by the Respondents to the Complainant, he has agreed in the open court to pay back the amounts on monthly installments.” In view of the said final order dated 12.2.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent concluding the proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent under Section 47 of the Act, the Corporation, if aggrieved, ought to have challenged the same by working out the appropriate remedy as available under law. Since the proceedings in Case No.180 of 2006 have already been concluded before the 2nd respondent, the cause in the writ petition does not survive and therefore no further enquiry is necessary in this writ petition. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the validity of the order dated 12.2.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the Corporation to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law to challenge the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12.2.2009. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 09.12.2009 gbs