IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 5875 of 2005 Between: Sake Narayanaswamy, S/o. Nallappa, M.I.G.91, Phase-I, Housing Board Colony, Anantapur. .... PETITIONER AND 1 Regional Manager, A.P.Raod Transport Corporation, Anantapur Division, Anantapur. 2 Vice Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Charminar 'X" Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 3 State of A.P., rep.by its Principal Secretary to Govt. Transport R & B Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 To issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and to declare the Tender Notiﬁcation No.2/122 (15)2005 RMA dt.02.03.2005 issued by Regional Manager, APSRTC, Ananthapur Region as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary, and violative of Argticle 14,16,19,46 of Constitution of India and contrary to the Government Orders and directions issued by the APSTRC and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the 1 st respondent to follow the Government Orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.120 T.R&B (Tr.VI) De[art,emt dt.29-03-1988 and G.O.Ms.No.195 TR & B (TR III) Dept. dt.01-11-2002 and to consider the case of the petitioner duly dispensing with the open tender syustem and to allot shops on the recommendation of the District Social Welfare Oﬃcer in consultation with the District Collector, Ananthapur and to reserve 15% shops as per the orders issued by the 3 rd Respondent and guidelines communicated by 2nd Respondent to the SC/ST and other poorer sections of Economically backward class candidates as against to total shops/stalls notified and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.RATNAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following Order: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.5875 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioner is resident of Ananthapur. He ﬁled instant writ petition challenging tender notiﬁcation dated 02.03.2005 issued by ﬁrst respondent inviting sealed tenders for running business in stall/canteens in various bus stations in Ananthapur region. The main grievance of the petitioner is that impugned tender notiﬁcation is contrary to the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.120 TR & B (TR VI) Department dated 29.03.1988 as modiﬁed in G.O.Ms.No.195 TR & B (TR III) Dept. dated 01.11.2002, whereunder reservation was provided for the candidates belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and economically backward classes. It is also contended that impugned tender notiﬁcation does not provide any reservation and therefore, the same is violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 46 of the Constitution of India. Though the writ petition was admitted on 21.03.2005, an observation was made in the miscellaneous application, being W.P.M.P.No.7781 of 2005, that allotment of two shops in Ananthapur bus station, one shop in Gooty bus station and one shop in Penugonda bus station, shall be subject to further orders in the writ petition. Subsequently by order dated 23.06.2005 said miscellaneous application was dismissed observing that the petitioner has no locus standi. The Law Oﬃcer of APSRTC has ﬁled a counter- aﬃdavit opposing the writ petition. Making a reference to the Government orders, it is stated that APSRTC issued Circular No.13/2003-OPD‘C’ dated 13.02.2003 earmarking/reserving one stall at all bus stations having ﬁve pucca stalls and two stalls in bus stations having ten or more pucca stalls to members of scheduled caste/scheduled tribe and poorer economically backward classes (SC/ST/PEBC) in non scheduled areas with similar reservation to scheduled tribe in scheduled areas. While doing so, depot shall be treated as a unit and if there are no ﬁve pucca stalls, there will not be any allotment for SC/ST/PEBC. It is also stated that pursuant to impugned tender notiﬁcation, Sri K. Srinivasulu of SC was allotted fruit and ﬂower stall at Ananthapur on 27.01.2004 for a period of six years. At Gooty bus station one stall was allotted to Sri Vinod Babu Naik of ST. The petitioner has not ﬁled any reply-aﬃdavit denying the counter averments, especially the averment that shops were already allotted to the candidates belonging to SC and ST. In that view of the matter this Court does not ﬁnd any inﬁrmity or illegality in the impugned tender notification. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 31st October, 2008 GHN To 1 Regional Manager, A.P.Raod Transport Corporation, Anantapur Division, Anantapur. 2 Vice Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Charminar 'X" Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 3 State of A.P., rep.by its Principal Secretary to Govt. Transport R & B Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 4 2CCs to GP for Roads and Buildings 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BJPR}