IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10264 of 2008 Between: Shaik Rasool S/o.Sk.Burhanuddin R/o.H.No.19-10-117, Etukuru Road, Guntur-3. ... PETITIONER AND The A.P.S.R.T.C. rep. by its Executive Director (Vja. & Vzm) Vijayawada. ...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 an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent in not passing any orders till date in appeal dt. 16.8.1999 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary and violative of the ARt. 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to pass orders in appeal dt. 16.8.1999 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner is working as Deputy Superintendent (Audit) in the APSRTC. Vide orders dated 21.4.1999, the Regional Manager, Guntur, imposed the punishment of stoppage of two increments, with cumulative effect. The petitioner claims to have filed an appeal before the respondent on 16.8.1999. His grievance is that no orders have been passed thereon, and he seeks appropriate direction, in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. The petitioner availed the departmental remedy of appeal, against the order passed by the Regional Manager, Guntur, on 21.4.1999. Nearly 8 years have elapsed, ever since the appeal was presented. If it was not disposed of, it needs to be immediately attended to. The petitioner is undergoing loss in terms of reduced emoluments, in view of the order passed by the disciplinary authority. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the respondent to pass orders in the appeal, preferred by the petitioner on 16.8.1999, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already passed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ 2nd May 2008 PAN