HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 1317 OF 2011 Between: A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, represented by its Managing Director and one another ………….Appellants AND P. Satish Kumar ………….Respondent JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Appeal is preferred by the APSRTC- respondents in the Writ Petition, challenging the direction issued by the learned Single Judge while allowing the WPMP instituted by the respondent herein. Earlier, when the petitioner filed the Writ Petition viz., W.P.No. 2962 of 2000, a learned Single Judge by order dated 28.9.2000 allowed the said Writ Petition and directed the APSRTC to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Shramik in accordance with his seniority as per the Circular No. PD- 30/2000 dated 2.5.2000. The petitioner was required to be able to read and writ only as his father had died prior to 10.5.1999. By proceedings dated 7.6.2001 the APSRTC in due implementation of the above order, informed the petitioner that he would be considered for appointment under the Bread Winner Scheme for the post of Shramik as and when sanctioned vacancies arise in Medak Region, as per his seniority. In spite of the same, as the case of the petitioner was not considered, he filed W.P.No. 3161 of 2008 along with interlocutory application viz., WPMP No. 4126 of 2008 to consider his case for appointment to a suitable post without reference to sanctioned vacancies. Learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC stated that the present qualification for appointment to the post of Shramik is TTI (Technical Training) and as the petitioner does not possess the said qualification, the APSRTC sought to deny his entitlement for appointment to the said post. In those circumstances, the learned Single judge allowed WPMP holding that the entitlement of the petitioner to be appointed to the post of Shramik stood crystallized under the earlier adjudication by this Court in W.P.No. 2962 of 2000 and that fact was also recognized by the APSRTC in its proceedings dated 7.6.2001 and for want of vacancy the petitioner was asked to wait. The learned Judge also directed the APSRTC to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Shramik or any other suitable post forthwith. In view of the above, we see no reasons to interfere with the finding given by the learned Single Judge and the Writ Appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal filed by the APSRTC is dismissed at the stage of admission itself. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ________________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J DATE: 21.12.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies.