IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.1625 of 2008 Between: Meka Durga Prasad S/o Bhaskar Rao R/o D. No. 40-19-3, Parka Gudem, Labbipet Post, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Regional Manager, AP.State Road Transport Corporation, Vijayawada, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus or otherwise declaring the action of the respondent in not consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Conductor on compassionate grounds despite making representation dated 7-5-2007 as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional violating Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and issue consequential directions directing the respondent to forthwith consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of conductor on compassionate grounds by disposing the representation of the petitioner dt 7-5-2007 and pass such other order or orders as it deems fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.V.KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondent: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.1625 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not considering his case for appointment to the post of Conductor on compassionate grounds despite making representation dated 07.05.2007, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent – Corporation and at their request the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal, though the matter is at interlocutory stage. According to the petitioner, his father was appointed as Conductor in the respondent Corporation on 03.11.1966 and after completion of four decades of service, he died on 24.10.2003 due to acute paralysis, while working at Vaidharpuram RTC Tire Retrading Shop. Thereafter, it is stated that the petitioner made a representation to the respondent Corporation on 22.03.2004 requesting to consider his case for appointment on compassionate grounds as Conductor under Social Security Scheme as he has passed S.S.C and eligible for being appointed to the said post. Since there was no response from the respondent, the petitioner made another representation on 07.05.2007 reiterating his earlier request for his appointment on compassionate grounds. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has not taken any action so far. Hence, this writ petition. Though the writ petition was admitted on 31.01.2008, no counter-affidavit has been filed. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submits that since the representations of the petitioner are pending consideration before the respondent, instead of this Court going into merits of the matter, the respondent may be directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, for which course of action, learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed. In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 07.05.2007 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. N.V.RAMANA, J Dt.24.11.2008 va/msv