IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 24091 of 2008 Between: K.Nirmala W/o.K.Shouri R/o.H.No.8-120, Nehru Nagar, Ramanthapur, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, East Zone, Ranga Reddy District at Uppal. .....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, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in not considering the Petitioner's representation dated 28.08.2008 for conversion of her Contract Carriage vehicle bearing No. AP 10 U 6237 into Light Motor Vehicle Maxi Cab by reducing its seating capacity from 15 in all to 13 in all as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules made there under and consequently direct the Respondent to grant permission to the Petitioner for conversion of her Contract Carriage Vehicle into Light Motor Vehicle Maxi Cab and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled questioning the action of the respondent in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 28.8.2008 for conversion of his Contract Carriage vehicle bearing registration No. AP 10U 6237 into Light Motor Vehicle Maxi Cab as illegal and arbitrary. The case of the petitioner is that he is owner of maxi cab (LMV) bearing registration No.AP 10U 6237 with a valid permit to operate the same as contract carriage. The petitioner for his personal reasons wants to convert it as personal/private vehicle and submitted a representation dated 28.8.2008 and since no further action in the matter is taken, filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport. Both counsel agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage. Since the representation of the petitioner dated 28.8.2008 is pending and in view of the agreed stand taken by both the counsel, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.5.11.2008 msv