IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2380 of 2000 Between: R.Venkata Narayana, S/o. Narsinhulu, R/o. Brahmanpalli, Medugula Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Vice Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Mahaboobnagar Region, Mahaboobnagar. .....RESPONDENTS 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 an order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the selection made in pursuance of notification NO.P1/684910)/98-RM- MBNR for the post of conductors in Mahaboobnagar Region in A.P.SR.T.C is illegal, unconstitutional being violative of Article 16 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner under the reserved category as conductor with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents : SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the selections made to the post of Conductors pursuant to Notification No.P1/684(10)/98-RM-MBNR. 2. The petitioner belongs to BC-B category. It is his grievance that the candidates, who were selected on merit, were also considered against the reserved vacancies of BC-B candidates, and thus, the policy of reservations was not followed. 3. Counter affidavit is filed by the respondents, denying the allegations made by the petitioner. It is categorically stated in the counter that out of 23 BC-B male candidates who were selected, 12 were shown against the O.C. category only, and the remaining 11 only were shown against the reserved category of BC-B. Further, it is stated that the last selected BC-B candidate i.e. Mr.A.Ashok has got 82.20 marks, whereas the petitioner has got only 81.20 marks. No rejoinder is filed by the petitioner, disputing the above averments made in the counter affidavit. 4. From the averments of the counter affidavit, it is clear that the allegation of the petitioner that even the candidates who were selected on merit, were shown against the reserved vacancies of BC-B candidates, is without any basis. In any event, though the writ petition is filed in the year 2000, the petitioner has not taken any steps for impleadment of the candidates who were selected pursuant to the impugned notification. In that view of the matter, I do not find any ground to set aside the selections made in pursuance to the said notification. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 3rd February 2009. ajr