IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 176 of 2005 Between: N. Venkataratnam S/o Venkatesh R/o Jammalamadugu, Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Cuddapah, (Regional Transport Officer). .....RESPONDENT 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 writ or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent is not considering and issuing the deviation in the variation Route as from Peddisettipalli to Jammalamadugu, Via, Chowdur and Salivendala instead of the exiting variation from Peddisettipalli to Jammalamadugu, Via, Kakirenipalli and Sheshareddypalli in respect of Petitioner's stage carriage bus bearing R.No.AP04/T-5742 as arbitrary illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondent to issue the deviation in the variation Route in Public interest. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.RAJANIKANTH JWALA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of the respondent in not considering and issuing the deviation permit in the variation Route as from Peddisettipalli to Jammalamadugu, Via, Chowdur and Salivendala instead of the existing viaration from Peddisettipalli to Jaammalamadugu, Via, Kakirenipalli and Sheshareddypalli in respect of petitioner’s stage carriage bus bearing No.R.No.AP04/T-5742, the present writ petition is filed. 2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the respondents have not considered the petitioner’s application and issuing deviation permit, and, therefore, the petitioner prays that necessary direction may be given to the respondents. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Transport opposed the same on the ground that it is for the respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law. 3. Admittedly, the respondent is the competent authority to grant stage carriage permit in accordance with the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and rules framed thereunder. 4 . Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner for grant of stage carriage permit in respect of his vehicle and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. ______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 09.02.2005. Note: Issue C.C. in three days. B.O. Ksn ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Cuddapah, (Regional Transport Officer). 2. Two C. Cs to G.P. for Transport, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 3. 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MPL}