THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.15056 OF 1999 DATED: 07.06.2010 Between : A. Prasad Rao … Petitioner And 1. APSRTC, rep.by its VC & MD, Musheerabad, Hyderabad., and 2 others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.15056 OF 1999 ORDER: The petitioner herein was working as a Conductor in Ashoka Bus Service Company - a Private Bus Service. Consequent to the nationalization of the routes in Warangal District, all the displaced persons of Ashoka Bus Service, including the petitioner herein, were absorbed in the services of the A.P.S.R.T.C. (for short, ‘Corporation’). Subsequently, the petitioner’s selection was cancelled by order dated 28.7.1989 alleging that on verification of the seniority of conductors worked in Ashoka Bus Service it was found that the petitioner was one among the junior most. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.10678 of 1989 and in compliance with the interim order passed by this Court the petitioner was allowed to continue in service of the Corporation as Conductor. It is also not in dispute that subsequently the petitioner’s services were regularized w.e.f. 1.3.1989. However, by order dated 14.8.1995 a revised order was passed by the Corporation regularizing the services of the petitioner and eight others w.e.f. 1.8.1995 without assigning any reasons. One of the affected persons, by name P. Venkateswarlu filed W.P.No.9679 of 1995 and pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, fresh orders have been passed in his favour regularizing his services w.e.f. 1.3.1989. However the petitioner’s request to regularize his services w.e.f. 1.3.1989 was rejected by the Corporation by proceedings dated 8.1.1999 stating that none of the juniors were regularized earlier to him. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Corporation, the fact that the services of P. Venkateswarlu have been regularized w.e.f. 1.3.1989 pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.No.9679 of 1995 has not been denied. As a matter of fact, W.A.No.247 of 1996 filed by the Corporation against the order in W.P.No.9679 of 1995 was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court. It is also not disputed before this Court that the said P. Venkateswarlu was working in Ashoka Bus Service along with the petitioner and both the petitioner and the said P. Venkateswarlu were absorbed in the services of the Corporation on the same day on 7.1.1988. Having regard to the above noticed facts which are not in dispute, particularly keeping in view the fact that the said P. Venkateswarlu is junior to the writ petitioner, I am of the opinion that the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his services w.e.f. 1.3.1989 on par with the said P.Venkateswarlu requires reconsideration. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 8.1.1999 is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services w.e.f. 1.3.1989 on par with P. Venkateswarlu and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 07.06.2010 gbs