V.Dharma Rao v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition Nos.13221, 13454 and 13457 of of 2007 COMMON ORDER:

In all these three Writ Petitions failure of the respondents, to appoint the petitioners as casual drivers is questioned as being arbitrary and illegal.

Sri S.V.Ramana, Learned Standing Counsel for A.P.S.R.T.C, would submit that the petitioners were initially appointed as contract drivers; their services have been regularized subsequently; and they are now working as drivers in the A.P.S.R.T.C. As it is now represented that the petitioners are working as regular drivers of the A.P.S.R.T.C, the cause in these Writ Petitions do not survive and these Writ Petitions have become infructuous. All these Writ Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. The Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

_________________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ.

Date:09.12.2016.

cs