IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23221 of 1999 Between: 1 M.Singaiah, S/o. Laxmaiah, Kolalapudi, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District. 2 K.Venkatarao, S/o. Guruvulu, Pedakodamaguntla, Karempudi Mandal, Guntur District. 3 Ashaik Naseema Sultana, W/o. S.Magbul Ahamed, D.No. 8- 60, Near Police Station' Donakonda, Prakasam District. 4 E.Mohan Rao, S/o. E.Subba Rao, Chennupalli, Ballikurava Mandal, Prakasam District. 5 K.Pavan Kumar, S/o. K.Srihari Rao, Munduru, Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District. 6 K.Satya Srinivasu, S/o. K.V.Achari, B.Colony, 4D/LD-268, Ibrahimpatnam, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONERS AND The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Regional Manager, Nalgonda Region, Nalgonda. .....RESPONDENT 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, order or direction, particularly in that nature of a Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the respondent in not issuing the Notiﬁcation, for the Post of Conductor on throughout the State of A.P., as required, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to consider petitioners our cases also for appointment to the post of conductor, 1999, and to appoint the petitioners if they are eligible. Counsel for the Petitioners :MR.T.S.RAYALU Counsel for the Respondent : SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23221 of 1999 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioners seek directions by way of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent in not issuing the notiﬁcation for the post of Conductor throughout the State of Andhra Pradesh, before making appointments, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. It is the case of petitioners that recruitment to the post of Conductor is being made Regionwise. In Nalgonda District, there arose about 166 vacancies of the post of Conductor, and the respondent-Corporation has issued notiﬁcation inviting applications to ﬁll up such vacancies. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent has not issued any public notiﬁcation outside Nalgonda District, and as such, they are deprived of the beneﬁt of applying to such post. 3. In the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the respondent-Corporation, it is stated that the notiﬁcation was published in Eenadu and Deccan Chronicle daily newspapers. It was also stated that the notiﬁcation was released to All India Radio, Hyderabad for broadcasting in employment news bulletin. It is stated that as per the notiﬁcation, applications were sold at all Depots of the Nalgonda Region from 01.06.1999 to 21.06.1999, and the last date for receipt of applications was 21.06.1999. It is also stated that several persons from outside the region of Nalgonda, have also applied and interviews were held on 11.11.1999. 4. From the averments made in the counter aﬃdavit, it is clear that there was a general notiﬁcation issued and was circulated by way of publication in newspapers of Eenadu and Deccan Chronicle. The very fact that the candidates from outside the Nalgonda region have also applied, would indicate that a very wide publicity was given by the respondent- Corporation, before making the appointments. Asmuch as the last date for submitting the applications was 21.06.1999, and the petitioners, having failed to apply within the notiﬁed time, rushed to this Court. From the averments made in the counter aﬃdavit, the allegation of the petitioners that the notiﬁcation was conﬁned to the region of Nalgonda alone, is not correct. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 26th August 2008 ajr To The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Nalgonda Region, Nalgonda.