THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.27285 OF 2003 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Driver in the respondent – Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation during the year 1996. While so, on the ground that he produced non-genuine educational certificate (Transfer Certificate), he was issued charge sheet on 26.8.1998 and after conducting enquiry, he was removed from service on 20.10.1998. The case of the petitioner is that the qualifications required for the post of driver is reading and writing simple sentences and hence removing him from service on the ground of submission of non-genuine educational certificate is unjust and illegal. After unsuccessfully availing the remedies of appeal and review, he filed the present writ petition. 3. The respondent – corporation filed counter and justified the action of removing the petitioner from service. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in similar circumstances, where a driver of the Corporation was removed on the ground of producing non-genuine educational certificate, he filed writ petition before this court in W.P.No.6275 of 2000 and this court by order dated 27.2.2008 directed the respondent – corporation to consider the case of the petitioner for fresh appointment as driver. The relevant portion is extracted as under for better appreciation: “I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made available on record. The petitioner himself has accepted that when he asked his father to obtain school certificate where he studied, his father obtained the certificate from a different school. In fact, he studied upto to sixth class in Bhimavaram and he has produced a Xerox copy of the certificate issued by the said school to show that he is a bona fide student and the certificate which was produced by mistake could not have been taken into consideration seriously, in view of the fact that there is no necessity of any basic educational qualification for appointment to the post of Driver except to have the knowledge of ‘read and write’. Further, the petitioner also relied upon the judgment rendered in two writ petitions being wP.Nos.19892 of 1999 and W.P.No.4921 of 2000, which were disposed of directing to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner herein is similarly placed with that of the petitioners, but their cases were considered by the respondents for appointment into the service of RTC, whereas the petitioner was disengaged. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merits, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh application ventilating his grievances along with the orders passed in the above writ petitions before the Regional Manager, West Godavari, Eluru within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the respondents shall entertain the same and pass appropriate orders and consider the case of the petitioner for fresh appointment as Driver. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.” 5. He submitted that in pursuance of the above directions of this court, the respondent corporation by proceedings in Non Dy.Supdt (P)/785(14)/09/RM/VSP dated 22.4.2009 issued orders engaging the petitioner therein as casual driver afresh. Therefore, he sought this court to pass similar orders in the present case. 6. Having regard to the above submission, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the above directions of this court in W.P.No.6275 of 2000 dated 27.2.2008. No costs. AVS ---------------------------- 29—03—2010