IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 28962 of 2008 Between: A.S. Reddy, S/o. Potha Reddy, (E-850768) APSRTC, Adilabad Region. ..... PETITIONER AND The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Adilabad Region, Adilabad District, Andhra Pradesh. .....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 a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondent in deleting the petitioner's name from the approved/selected list of conductors of APSRTC, Adilabad Region is bad, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violation of principles of natural justice by setting aside order proceedings No. E1/255(34)/2004-RM:ADB, dated 17-01-2006 of the respondent and consequently direct the respondent to restore the name of the petitioner in the approved/selected list of conductors by protecting the past service in APSRTC, Adilabad Region by engaging petitioner to duties and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in deleting the petitioner’s name from the approved/selected list of Conductors of A.P.S.R.T.C., Adilabad Region, as arbitrary and illegal and to set aside the Proceedings dated 17.1.2006 issued by the respondent and consequently to direct the respondent to restore the petitioner’s name in the approved/selected list of Conductors by protecting the past service in APSRTC, Adilabad Region by engaging him to duties. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. This Court, on 29.6.2006, in similar case in W.P.No.13065 of 2006, while allowing the writ petition held as follows: Having regard to the facts and circumstance of the case, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. The name of the petitioner shall be continued in the panel of select conductors and the entrustment of the duties to the petitioner shall depend upon the availability of work on the concerned day. However, if the transfer becomes inevitable, the petitioner shall be given the option, to choose the places of her choice within the region.” Inasmuch as the subject matter of the present writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passed in W.P.No.13065 of 2006, following the said order and for the reasons mentioned therein, this writ petition is also allowed in terms thereof. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 31st December, 2008 bcj