HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15843 of 2011 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not protecting the pay of the petitioner attached to the post of Driver and not fixing the pay by adding the increment as illegal and arbitrary. The averments, in brief, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner was appointed as Driver by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in the year 1996. In the course of periodical medical examination, he was declared as unfit to discharge the functions of Driver. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents to consider his case for alternative employment. But, no action has been taken thereon. Hence, he filed W.P.No.19535 of 2001 and the same was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents to consider his case in terms of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 ( for short ‘the Act). Consequently, his case was considered and he was appointed as Shramik. His grievance is that the respondents are not protecting his pay and not granting the increments attached to the post of Driver while extending the same benefits to other similarly situated persons. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that when the petitioner was medically unfit, he was given alternative employment as Shramik and while appointing him as Shramik, his pay has not been protected and his pay was not fixed by granting the increments attached to the post of Driver. He prays to give necessary directions in this regard. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents contended that appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondents in accordance with the regulations governing the service conditions of the petitioner. The factual matrix is not in dispute. While the petitioner was working as Driver in the respondent-Corporation, he was declared as unfit to discharge the functions as Driver and hence, he was given alternative employment as per Section 47 of the Act. Therefore, appropriate decision has to be taken by the respondents in accordance with the regulations governing the service conditions of the petitioner as to pay protection and fixation etc., Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to take appropriate decision within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter communicate the same to the petitioner. No costs. ____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 24th June 2011 kdl.