IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.1830 OF 2010 Between: K. Kupamma, W/o. K. Mohan Naidu ..... PETITIONER AND The A.P.S.R.T.C., represented by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.1830 OF 2010 ORDER: The matter is coming up for admission. 2. Heard Sri V. Raghu, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner and Smt. W.V.S. Rajeswari, learned standing counsel representing respondents. 3. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not paying the hire charges, for the excess kilometres, for the vehicle of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India and pass such other suitable orders. 4. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the stage carriage vehicle bearing No.AP03 U 3179. The said vehicle was purchased by investing huge amounts with a view to operate the same on the nationalized mufisil services. It is also stated that from 01.04.2007 to 30.06.2007 the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the corporation. It is further stated that on 04.09.2004, respondent No.3 issued proceedings evidencing the fact that the vehicle is used in excess of 5 kilometres to the originally allotted distances. On 25.03.2001, respondent No.2 having utilized the vehicle of the petitioner by deviating the route had reduced the figures for the purpose of payment of the bills. It is also stated that the petitioner made several representations relating to the excess utilization of the vehicle and for non-payment of the hire charges for the excess utilization of the vehicle. But, however, no appropriate further steps had been taken in this regard. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed strong reliance on the order made by this Court in W.P.No.15921 of 2007, dated 18.04.2008. 6. The said writ petition was disposed of as hereunder: “Having regard to the above mentioned submission of the learned Standing counsel, the writ petition is disposed of. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to initiate immediate steps to conduct a joint survey by allowing the petitioner to participate in the said survey and pay extra hire charges in the event the petitioner’s bus was found having plied for any distance in excess of the distance stipulated in the agreement. They shall complete this exercise within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 7. In the light of the same, this Court is of the considered opinion that the writ petition be disposed of directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to initiate immediate steps to conduct a joint survey by allowing the petitioner to participate in the said survey and pay extra hire charges in the event of petitioner’s bus was found having plied for any distance in excess of the distance stipulated in the agreement. They shall complete this exercise within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ P.S. NARAYANA, J February 03, 2010 MD