IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED WRIT APPEAL NO : 295 of 2005 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 09/11/2004 in WP NO. 20625 OF 2004 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Adilabad Region, Adilabad District. 2. The Divisional Manager, APSRTC., Adilabad Division, Adilabad District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. P.Sathaiah, S/o.P.Ramaiah, H.No.4-55, Bazarwadi (St), Sandeep Nagar, Asifabad, Adilabad District. 2. Moin Ahmed S/o.Md.Yunus, H.No.3-222, Rajeevnagar, Bazarwadi (St) Asifabad, Adilabad District. 3. Md.Rizuddin, S/o.Shaik Hyder, H.No.10-54, Khadinu Masjid (St), Asifabad, Adilabad District. 4. Vijaya Kumar Chowda, S/o.Bheemji, R/o.Rebban (P) & (M), Adilabad District. 5. J.Prakash, S/o.J.Pochaiah, H.No.3-128, Rajeev Nagar, Bazarwadi (St) Asifabad, Adilabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants : SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY. Counsel for the Respondents : MR.G.RAVI MOHAN. The Court at the stage of admission made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.CHELAMESWAR AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED W.A.NO.295 OF 2005 ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per the Honble Sri Justice J.Chelameswar) Aggrieved by an order dated 9th November 2004 in Writ Petition No.20625 of 2004, the respondents preferred this appeal. Respondents herein have been working as drivers in the appellant-Corporation. It appears that they were initially appointed as adhoc drivers and later on their services were regularized. The only grievance of the respondents herein ventilated before the learned single Judge in the writ petition is that while their services were regularized, the services of certain other employees of the Corporation who are juniors to them (drivers of the Corporation) were regularized from their date of initial appointment, i.e., the date on which they were initially employed as adhoc drivers and the same benefit was not given to the writ petitioners. In the above-mentioned background, the learned single Judge, declared that the petitioners (respondents herein) are entitled to be considered “for regularization if it is a fact that the services of their juniors were regularized from the date of the initial appointment in the concerned region.” A declaration, in our view, is in perfect conformity with the rule of law and the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. We see no reason to interfere with the order under appeal and the writ appeal is therefore, dismissed at the stage of admission. ______________ J.Chelameswar, J ___________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J mrk 28th February 2005. To 1. The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Adilabad Region, Adilabad District. 2. The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Adilabad Division, Adilabad District. 3. Two CD copies.