Disposed

The Divisional Manager/Regional Manager, v. Vesapogu Sudhakar Rao

Telangana HC10 Nov 2014WA/251/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ appeal challenging a Single Judge's order directing an RTC corporation to potentially relax height requirements for a driver. The Court found no provision for such relaxation and quashed the directive, noting the respondent might already be employed.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal disposed of; order to grant height exemption or appoint as cleaner is not sustained; no further steps if not already absorbed.

The Divisional Manager/Regional Manager… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶4

Writ Appeal No.251 of 2006

¶5

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy)

¶6

A route in the District of Prakasam, on which private buses were permitted to operate, was nationalised. As part of the scheme, the employees, who were working in the buses so operated, were to be absorbed in the APSRTC. The respondent claims that he has been working as Driver, on a bus, bearing No.TNM 6955, that was being operated on the route, but his case was not considered. He filed W.P.No.10109 of 1989, in that behalf. The writ petition was disposed of, with a direction to the Corporation i.e. the appellant herein, to consider the case of the respondent. The respondent pleaded that he appeared before the Selection Committee on 29.03.1994 and though he was found to be qualified, he was not absorbed. Feeling aggrieved by the non-selection, the respondent filed W.P.No.21589 of 1994.

¶7

The appellant opposed the writ petition by filing a counter affidavit. According to it, the height of the respondent was only 158 centimetres, as against the minimum stipulated height of 163 centimetres. Through order, dated 09.09.2004, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition, directing that the appellant may consider the feasibility of absorbing the respondent as Driver, by granting exemption to the extent of about 2 inches, in height, and that if, for any reason, it is not feasible, the respondent may be appointed, or absorbed as Cleaner. The said order is challenged in this writ appeal.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶9

The basis for the respondent to claim relief was his having been employed as a Driver in a bus, which was operating on a route, which came to be nationalised. The appellant did consider the case of the respondent, may be on the direction issued by this Court. However, the absorption could not take place, on account of the fact that the respondent was not up to the stipulated height. No provision was cited that enables the appellant to relax the requirement as to height. The direction of providing alternative employment as Cleaner is also not referable to any circular or memo. We find it difficult to sustain the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶10

At the same time, in case the appellant has already employed or absorbed the respondent in any post, he shall remain in service, until he attains the age of superannuation. If, on the other hand, he has not been absorbed or appointed so far, no further steps need be taken.

¶11

The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

The miscellaneous petitions filed in this appeal shall also stand disposed of.

¶13

____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

¶14

_____________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J.

¶15

Date:10.11.2014 GJ

The Divisional Manager/Regional Manager, v. Vesapogu Sudhakar Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager/Regional Manager, v. Vesapogu Sudhakar Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Apsrtc, Vs S.S. Narayana

R. Srinivasa Setty, Vs The Depot Manager, Apsrtc

N. Ravi Kumar, Vs The General Manager

Mizbaba Vs Mrs T.Praveena

Mizbana, Vs v.Vijaya Lakshmi

The Regional Joint Director Vs K.Mangatayaru, W/o. Late K.Kasulu