IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1983 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 23.2.2000 in WP NO : 7177 OF 1994 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Bhoopathi Reddy, S/o.Malla Reddy R/o.Warangal, Warangal District ….. APPELLANT AND 1. The Depot Manager, APSRTC Warangal-II Depot 2. The Managing Director, APSRTC Musheerabad 3. The Regional Manager, APSRTC Warangal, Warangal District 4. The Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, Warangal District Rep.by its Presiding Officer .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant : MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & NEERAJA REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SMT.G.JYOTHI KIRAN, STANDING COUNSEL FOR APSRTC Counsel for Respondent No.4 : GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR LABOUR The Court made the following ORDER : ( per TMK,J) This writ appeal is filed by the appellant/writ petitioner against the order in W.P.No.7177 of 1994 dated 23.2.2000 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court. The above writ petition was disposed of by the learned single Judge of this Court with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the appellant/writ petitioner for appointment to the post of cleaner in physically handicapped quota as and when recruitment takes place to fill up the post at point No.31 without reference to his non-selection in the earlier recruitment. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner that even though the Labour Court has given a direction to appoint the appellant/writ petitioner, he was not appointed either in B.C-D quota or in physically handicapped quota and that in the year 1997, one Mr.B.Srinivas was appointed in physically handicapped quota at point No.6. Learned counsel further contended that the appointment of said Srinivas was made against the judgment of the Labour Court. But, however, it has to be observed that the said incumbent was neither a party to the writ petition nor the writ appeal and his appointment has not been challenged by the appellant/writ petitioner. Under the above circumstances, without going into the merits of the appointment of said Srinivas, we make it clear that the case of the appellant/writ petitioner be considered for appointment to the post of cleaner under the physically handicapped quota as directed by the learned single Judge. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. (T.MEENA KUMARI,J) (S.ANANDA REDDY, J) 31.01.2005 bsv/lvl To 1. The Depot Manager, APSRTC Warangal-II Depot 2. The Managing Director, APSRTC Musheerabad 3. The Regional Manager, APSRTC Warangal, Warangal District 4. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, Warangal District 5. Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Labour, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT) 6. Two CD copies