IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 1877 of 2001 Between: A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mushirabad, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rep. by its Presiding Officer, A.P., Hyderabad. 2 Regional Transport Authority, Rep. by its Secretary Nellore,. 3 Sri Khaja Jilani Basha, Insakadonaka, Ranganayakulapeta, Nellore, Nellore District .....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 appropriate writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order item No. 63 in Rc.No. 2855/A3/95, dt. 16-5-1995 of the Regional Transport Authority, Nellore, grantign variation of the existing route, Vedayapalem to Patur, as Vedayaplem to Yellayapalem to the 3rd respondent as confirmed in the order dt. 24.10.2000 made in RP No. 63/98., State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.p. Hyderabad; and quash the same as being illegal, without jurisdinction and invalid, and declaring that the very grant of the original permit by the Regional Transport Authoirty, Nellore to 3rd respondent on the route, Vedayapalem to Patur, is illegal, without jurisdiction and invalid, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.HARINATH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : Order: The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the APSRTC’) questions the order dated 24th October, 2000, passed by the first respondent-State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., Hyderabad, in RP.No.63/98, confirming the order dated 16-05-1995, of the second respondent- Regional Transport Authority, Nellore, in Rc.No.2855/A3/95, granting variation of the existing route permit from ‘Vedayapalem to Patur’, to ‘Vedayapalem to Yellayapalem’, as sought by the third respondent herein. The third respondent has got the existing route permit from ‘Vedayapalem to Patur’ and the extension was sought from Patur to Yellayapalem, which is at a distance of 3.1 kms. Admittedly, there is no approved scheme of the APSRTC governing the variation sought for, and therefore, it cannot be said that grant of such variation prohibits any approved scheme. Both the authorities below rightly held that the variation sought for is not covered by any approved scheme of the APSRTC. Therefore, the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality and infirmity. The Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ (V.Eswaraiah, J) 4th April, 2008 lur ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rep. by its Presiding Officer, A.P., Hyderabad. 2 Regional Transport Authority, Rep. by its Secretary Nellore,. 3 2CCs to 4 2CD copies