HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU W.P.No. 16818 of 2011 Date: 21-06-2011 Between: V.S. Rao …………. Petitioner And APSRTC, rep by its Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Road, Hyderabad and another. …………. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU W.P.No. 16818 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in issuing the proceedings No.E1/255(4)/2010-RM.NZB, dated 18-09-2010 in not paying the salary for the forced unemployment period from 01-08-2009 to 18-09- 2010 duly treating it as duty period and not counting the petitioner’s seniority in the driver category, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunity, Protection and Participation) Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’), and consequently to direct the respondents to treat the intervening period from 01-08-2009 to 18-09-2010 as duty with wages. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner joined the services of the respondent-corporation, as Driver on 25-01-1995 through due process of selection and subsequently, his service was regularized w.e.f. 01-08-1996. His retirement is due on 27-10-2009. Before that, he was not allowed to work from 01-08-2009 on the ground that he was suffering with defective vision and kept him under forced leave till his retirement on 27-10-2009. During the course of forced leave, he was not provided with any alternative employment or arranged the wages. Therefore, he filed W.P.No.27408 of 2008 before this Court and this Court disposed of the same through the order, dated 25-02-2010 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and provide him an alternative employment in their Corporation as provided for under Section 47 of the said Act and the said exercise shall be done within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. In pursuance thereof, the impugned order, dated 18-09-2010 was passed by the second respondent whereunder and whereby the petitioner was offered alternative employment as Record Tracer, however, it is observed that he shall not be allowed additional monetary benefit as envisaged under Regulation 6(A)(5)(b) of the Service Regulations and that his seniority in the post of Record Tracer shall be reckoned from the date of his reporting to duty as Record Tracer for further promotion. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that the case of the petitioner has not been considered in accordance with the Regulations of the Service Regulations. 4. Therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the Rules and Regulations and also with reference to Section 47 of the Act within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. For this purpose, the petitioner shall make a representation within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as to the relief he sought for and thereafter, respondents shall take appropriate decision on his representation. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J Date: 21-06-2011 YCR