IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO: 5649 of 1998 Between: Srinivasa Dixit S/o Umababu Dixit, Balaga, Srikakulam Srikakulam District ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Srikakulam 2 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad 3 K.Ramarao S/o Appalasuri Plot No.48, Visakha 'B' Colony Srikalkulam 4 K.Balasundara Rao S/o Late Narsingarao Narsingarao Street, Amadalavalasa Gate, Srikakulam District 5 K.Ganesh Kumar S/o Late Narsimhulu Narsingarao Street, Amadalavalasa Gate, Srikakulam Distirct 6 K.V.V.S.Prasad S/o Late Narsimhulu Narsingarao Street, Amadalavalasa Gate, Srikakulam District 7 Umababu Dixit S/o B.A. Shanker Dixit Plot No.7, Siridi Sai Nagar, Balaga, Srikakulam , Srikakulam Distirct 8 The Presiding Officer, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., City Civil Court bldgs., Hyderabad ...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 any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the order passed in A.P.Nos., 291, 293, 294, 296 and 306 of 95 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, AP., Hyderabad ., i.e., the 8th Respondent herein dt. 23/02/1998 as illegal and unconstitutional. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.H.RAMA KRISHNA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus declaring the order passed in A.P.Nos.291, 293, 294, 296 and 306 of 95 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., Hyderabad, i.e. the 8th respondent herein, dated 23-02-1998 as illegal and unconstitutional. 2. None appears for the Petitioner. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. It is represented by the learned Government Pleader that the subject matter in this writ petition is squarely covered by a judgment of the Supreme Court in Mithilesh Garg, petitioner V. Union of India and others , wherein a batch of writ petitions was dismissed by the Supreme Court. 4. Recording the above submission and following the ratio in the aforementioned judgment, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Office is directed to annex a copy of the aforementioned judgment, to this order. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J March 10, 2005 MRR Copy to: 1 The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Srikakulam 2 The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad 3 The Presiding Officer, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., City Civil Court bldgs., Hyderabad 4 Two C.C. s to the G.P. for Transport, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two C.D. Copies.