THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO W.P.NO.32557 OF 2010 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner on par with juniors is illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Driver on par with his juniors. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as contract Driver on 5.5.2006 in the respondent- Corporation. Basing on the vigilance report about the discrepancy of the date of birth in the driving licence, he was terminated from the service on 25-09-2006. The complaint of the Vigilance Officer is that his date of birth as per the driving licence is 15-2-1976, whereas the Additional Licencing Authority, Tirupati, informed to the Vigilance Officer that his date of birth is 15.2.1971. Hence, he approached the Additional Licencing Authority, Tirupati for necessary clarification and the Additional Licencing Authority clarified that his date of birth is 15-2- 1976 but not 15-2-1971. Therefore, he submitted a representation dated 30-08-2006 to the 2nd respondent to re-engage him into service along with the clarification issued by the Additional Licencing Authority. The 2nd respondent having kept quiet for 18 months, reinstated him into service. The respondent-Corporation regularized the services of the contract drivers in the month of March, 2010. However, his services are not regularized on par with his juniors. Hence, he submitted a representation dated 27-3-2010 to the 2nd respondent, but no action has been taken so far. Hence, the writ petition. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is stated that as per Circular No.3/06 dated 23-1-2006 and Clause 13, it is specified that upon verification of the driving licence if the same is found to be non-genuine, the contract appointment shall be terminated duly giving a notice for deletion of the name from the contract drivers panel. Accordingly, a notice dated 31-08-2006 was issued for deletion/termination of the petitioner. The petitioner acknowledged the said notice on 7-9-2006, but did not submit any explanation within the stipulated time and accordingly, he was terminated. It is further stated that the petitioner submitted a representation to the Regional Manager, Tirupati and on considering the same, the petitioner was reinstated into service on 29-4-2008 and his services were regularized on par with others with effect from 1-1-2011 at Madanapalli Depot and that the petitioner cannot have any grievance. Apparently, the petitioner was given notice, but the petitioner did not respond to the same. Therefore, the services of the petitioner were terminated by the authorities. Admittedly, he was not in continuous service till he was re-engaged and there is time gap between his termination and the date of re-engagement. It is for the authorities concerned to issue suitable clarification on that score. However, if the petitioner makes any representation afresh to the respondents to ventilate his grievance, the respondents shall consider such representation as expeditiously as possible and pass appropriate orders. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ K.S.APPA RAO,J rkk Dated: 15-12-2011