HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 3767 of 2002 DATED 18th October, 2011 BETWEEN A.Gopala Reddy and ors …….Petitioners and APSRTC, rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director, Musheerbad, Hyderabad, and ors. …… Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 3767 of 2002 ORDER: Challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents in absorbing the petitioners in the posts of Conductors, Drivers, Cleaners or any other suitable posts, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition. It is the case of the petitioners that they worked as Drivers, Conductors, Cleaners, checking-cum-Conductors and Electricians in the bus bearing No.TMN 7732 plying on the route: Pamaru—Sastryvaripalli via Sotla Gudur for a period of seven months from March, 1986 to September, 1986 and that as the said route was nationalized in the year 1987, they were displaced from the service of the said bus. It is stated that the respondent-Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) had issued circulars to absorb the similarly situated displaced persons and when their case was not considered, they filed Writ Petition No. 20778 of 1994, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 27.12.1994 directing the respondent- APSRTC to absorb the petitioners in the suitable posts in accordance with law in as much as they were the displaced employees of a private bus operator and the same was certified by the Private Bus Operator and the Labour Officer to that effect. In the writ appeal preferred by the respondent-APSRTC against the said order, a Division Bench of this Court set aside the same and directed the respondents to act upon the certificate issued by the Labour Officer. Pursuant to the same, the respondent-APSRTC considered and rejected the case of the petitioners on the ground that they have not continuously worked for a period of one year as on the date of nationalization of the route. It is thus the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent- APSRTC absorbed the similarly situated displaced employees who have put in less than one year service and they have stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition as to the particulars of displaced employees from private buss bearing Nos. AAN 8820 and 5266 who have not put in one year service as on the relevant date. The respondent-APSRTC have filed a counter affidavit denying the averments made by the petitioners. It is stated that the bus bearing registration No. TMN 7732 was covered by temporary permit valid from 20.3.1986 till the scheme approved; and that the said bus was stopped to ply on the route in question from 12.09.1986; and that the total period of operation of the said bus was five months twenty three days and as such the petitioners who had not worked continuously for a period of one year would not be termed as displaced workers and they are not entitled for absorption. It is stated that as the petitioners had not put in minimum period of one year continuous service as on the date of nationalization of the route in question as per circle dated 10.11.1983, and therefore such workers are not entitled for absorption. It is further stated that vehicle No. 5266 plied on the route Kolukula to Gangulapalem plied for a period from 20.4.1984 till the scheme became in force i.e. 7.8.1986 and as such its workers had been absorbed as they have put in more than minimum one year service and that bus bearing AAN.No. 8820 does not belong to Prakasam District. For the aforesaid specific stand of the respondents that as the petitioners had not put in minimum period of one year continuous service as on the date of nationalization of route as per the circular No. 75/83-84 dated 10.11.1983, they are not entitled to be considered for absorption in any of the suitable posts in the respondent- APSRTC. The petitioners have failed to substantiate that they had put in minimum period of one year continuous service as on the relevant date. It is therefore manifest from the material placed on record that no case is made out by the petitioners for giving a direction to the respondent-APSRTC to absorb them in its service. For the foregoing discussion, I do not see any merit in the Writ Petition, which is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. --------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 18th October, 2011. Msnro