IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 20784 of 2000 Between: P.Venkataiah S/o. P.Chinna Reddy O/o. A.P.Travel & Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., A.C.Guards, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.Travel & Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Rep by its Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Government of Andhra Pradesh, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad. 2 The Medical Officer, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Taranaka Hospital, Taranaka, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 direction, Writ or order, one in the nature of Mandamus, a) declaring the action the respondent herein in reverting the petitioner from Heavy Motor Vehicle Driver to a lower post of Driver-Cleaner basing on the medical certificate dt. 4.10.99 through impugned proceeding dt. 30.12.1999 bearing No. H.C. No. 1203/E2/Admn/TTDC/99 issued by the Respondent No.1 herein is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, Consequently set aside the same, b) directing the respondent No. 1 to consider the petition representation for re-medical examination by an independent medical body by setting aside the consequential order dt. 15.5.2000 in the interest of Justice, c) granting all consequential benefits including seniority, promoting, arrears salary etc., d) awarding Costs, or any other order appropriate in the case may be passed. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.M.V.PRAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : MR.A.K.NARASIMHA RAO The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20784 of 2000 ORAL ORDER : When the matter came up for hearing, it is represented by the learned Standing Counsel for the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed in terms of the order, dated 16-04-2002, passed by this Court in W.P.No.22201 of 2000. 2. However, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 27-11-2008. Msr HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20784 of 2000 27-11-2008 Msr