IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15015 of 1999 Between: M.Joshue S/o.Mathew, Christian, R/o.D.No.3-89, Vellore Road, Greamspet, Chittoor, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Musherabad, Hyderabad. 2 A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep. by its Regional Manager, Tirupati, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings of the 1st Respondent in CG1/119/99-PO-I, dt.29.5.1999, by calling the records and examine the legality, propriety and correctness of the said proceedings by consequently re-entrust the verification of genuineness of DL.No.134/1982 with the Assistant Registering Authority Meenambakam at Alandur, Chennai, Tamilnadu and H.S.No.309/1998 from Additional Licencing Authority ,Chittoor and consequently direct the Respondent to appoint the petitioner as Driver Grade-II in APSRTC Tirupati Region with seniority benefits and pass necessary orders or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.S.GOPALA KRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15015 OF 1999 ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in rejecting the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Driver Grade-II in A.P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’). According to the petitioner, he applied for the post of Driver Grade-II pursuant to a notification issued by the Corporation and was subjected to selection process. Subsequently, he received a letter, dated 26.08.1997, from the 2nd respondent – Regional Manager, Tirupati Region, informing that he was provisionally selected for the said post and asking to undergo medical examination and to deposit Rs.500/- towards security deposit for undergoing training at Zonal Staff Training College, Nellore. The petitioner, after complying with the conditions, has undergone training at the aforesaid college for four months. But, to his surprise, no appointment order was issued to him, while the other selected candidates were issued with appointment orders and posted at various places. He made several representations to the authorities ventilating his grievance, but there was no response. Ultimately, the impugned proceedings, dated 29.05.1999, were issued by the 1st respondent stating that, on verification, the driving license produced by the petitioner was found to be not genuine and, hence, his request for appointment could not be entertained. The petitioner alleges that verification of his driving license was not properly done and, in fact, his driving license is a genuine one issued by the competent authority. A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating that on preliminary verification of the certificates produced by the petitioner, he was subjected to selection process and provisionally selected for the post of Driver Grade-II, subject to medical examination, verification of his certificates and driving license by the authorities concerned and other formalities. Consequently, on his being found fit in the medical examination, he was sent to Zonal Staff Training College, Nellore for training. During the course of training, the driving license bearing No.134/82 submitted by the petitioner was sent to the Licensing Authority, Chennai, for verification as to its genuineness. The Assistant Licensing Authority, Chennai, sent a report, dated 31.08.1998, stating that the driving license No.134/82 was not issued in the name of the petitioner. Thus, the driving license produced by the petitioner was found to be not genuine and, accordingly, he was denied appointment. From the aforesaid averments made in the counter-affidavit, it is evident that the driving license produced by the petitioner was duly verified by the competent authority and was found to be not genuine. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner could not fulfill the eligibility criteria of having a valid driving license for appointment to the post of Driver and, hence, he was rightly denied employment. The same cannot be said to be either arbitrary or illegal. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 2nd May, 2008. IBL To 1 The Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Musherabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Tirupati, Chittoor District. 3 Two CD Copies