Telangana High Court
WP/25179/2004 of S. Srinivasulu, Vs The A.PS.R.T.C. rep by its Regional Manager, on 31 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 25179 of 2004 Between: S. Srinivasulu, S/o. Janaiah, R/o. Miryalaguda, Nalgonda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 25179 of 2004
Between:
S. Srinivasulu, S/o. Janaiah,
R/o. Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1 The A.PS.R.T.C. rep by its Regional Manager, Nalgonda.
2 The Depot Manager, A.PS.R.T.C. Nalgonda.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of therespondents in withholding the amounts of the petitioner and not releasing fullamount as per the plying of the bus as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to record andviolative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent torelease the difference amount as per the representations dt. 3-7-2001, 9-1-2001, 29-9-2004 and 1-11-2004.
Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD, STANDINGCOUNSEL FOR APSRTC
The Court at the stage of admission, made the following :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Withholding the amounts of the petitioner and not releasingfull amount as per the plying of the bus, the present writpetition is filed.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that somepenal amount has to be paid by the respondent-Corporationand for that the made severalpurpose, petitioner representations including the last representation dated1.11.2004, but the respondent-Corporation have not passedany orders.
On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for therespondents contended that the petitioner is bound by the terms and conditions of the agreement in plying the vehicle. Ifthere is any penal amount to be paid, the same shall have tobe considered in accordance with the terms and conditions ofthe contract.
Therefore, without entering into the merits of the case, adirection is given to the respondents to take appropriatedecision in pursuance of the contract between the petitionerand the respondents in plying the vehicle and if there is anyamount to be paid, the same may be paid in accordance withthe terms and conditions of the contract within two monthsfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
__________
31.12.2004
bsv
To
1 The Regional Manager,A.PS.R.T.C. , Nalgonda.
2 The Depot Manager, A.PS.R.T.C. Nalgonda.