THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 6795 of 2010 O R D E R: Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is squarely covered by an order dated 1.2.2006 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 1860 of 2006, whereunder the writ petition filed by similarly situated persons as that of the petitioner was allowed and, therefore, this writ petition is also liable to be allowed in terms of the said judgment. Learned standing counsel for the respondents, though opposed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, did not dispute the facts of the aforementioned order and the issue involved therein. On perusal of the order relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am satisfied that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the same and, hence, this writ petition is also liable to be allowed following the said Order dated 1.2.2006 in W.P.No. 1860 of 2006. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.2.2010 is hereby set aside. The name of the petitioner shall be continued in the panel of select conductors and the entrustment of the duties to the petitioner shall depend upon the availability of work on the concerned day. However, if the transfer becomes inevitable, the petitioner shall be given the option to choose the place of his choice within the region. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 14-6-2010. MVB.