IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18338 of 2004 Between: V.Padma d/o V.Venkat Reddy Ankalamma Gudi, Simhadripuram mandal, Pulivendala, Kadapa Distirct. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The AP.State Road Transport Corporation Red. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad 2 The AP.State Road Transport Corporation, rep.by its Regional Manager, Cuddapah Region, Cuddapah Cuddapah 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 an order or direction or writ Particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents instead of regularizing the services of the petitioner as regular conductor, the 2nd respondent has passed an impugned order by its Proceedings No.E1/255(34)/84-RM 'C', dt. 23/08/2004 re-engaging the petitioner as Casual conductor with effect from 25/08/2004 to 12/09/2004 in place of regular conductors in connection with special operation for Krishna Pushkarams in Vijayawada Region is wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to law and also violative of Article 14,16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the service of the Petitioner by reinstating the petitioner into service as conductor Gr-II with continuity of service and with full Back Wages Counsel for the Petitioner:MS.B.MALLESWARI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Sri P.Vinakaya Swamy The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER: The petitioner was selected as a conductor in the regular process and she was engaged as a casual conductor in the respondent-Corporation through the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 29-3-2000. Subsequently, the petitioner was being engaged as a casual conductor at various places and lastly at Vijayawada through the proceedings dated 23-08-2004. Subsequent to Krishna Pushakaram, the 3rd respondent stopped engaging the petitioner as a casual conductor though there is sufficient work. Since the petitioner is in the list of selected conductors, it is appropriate for the respondents to utilize the services of the petitioner as a casual conductor as and when there is work. In the light of the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to engage the petitioner as a casual conductor as and when there is work and as per the rotation on par with the similarly placed persons. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________ 8-10-2004 rkk To 1 The Chairman and Managing Director, AP.State Road Transport Corporation, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, AP.State Road Transport Corporation, Cuddapah Region, Cuddapah Cuddapah District. 3 Two CD copies.