Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/16389/2024 of Kolia Jagannadha Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 1 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 16389/2024 Between: 1. KOLIA JAGANNADHA RAO,, S/O. LATE SRI K. LATCHANNA, AGED ABOUT 55
APHC010323992024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 16389/2024
Between:
1. KOLIA JAGANNADHA RAO,, S/O. LATE SRI K. LATCHANNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, A.P.S.R.T.C. DRIVER, E. 775744, R/O.
SASANAM
VILLAGE
AND
POST,
TEKKALI
MANDAL,
SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY
ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROADS
AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC TRANSPORT, AND VICE- CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, A.P.S.R.T.C., NTR
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, PNBS COMPLEX, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
3. THE DISTRICT PUBLIC TRANSPORT OFFICER, A.P.S.R.T.C.
SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
4. THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC, TEKKALI DEPOT, TEKKALI, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in rejected the claim of the petitioner for providing alternative employment vide impugned Proceedings No.Supdt.(P)/785(10)/2023-DPTO/TKL dated- 20.7.2023 by stating that the petitioner is unfit for the post of Driver in A1 category and all other categories as per the Medical Standards of APSRTC is contrary to the provisions made under Section 47 of the Disability Act, 1995 while considering the similarly situated persons like Sri J.Bhaskara Rao, E.775950, Tekkali Depot posted to Parvathipuram and Sri S. S Rao, Tekkali Deport posted to S. Kota as Record Tracer and rejected the case of the petitioner is highly illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to law, hence the same is liable to be set aside and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for alternative appointment as Record Tracer or any one of the suitable post as per the provisions made under Section 47 of the Disability Act, 1995 with all consequential benefits and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the respondents No. 2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Record Tracer or in any one of the suitable post as per the provisions made under Section 47 of the Disability Act, 1995 by suspending the impugned Proceedings vide No.
Supdt. (P)/785(10)/2023-DPTO/TKL dated: 20.7.2023 of the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC)
2. GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court 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:
1. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for providing alternative employment vide impugned Proceedings No.Supdt.(P)/785(10)/2023-DPTO/TKL dated 20.07.2023, by stating that the petitioner is unfit for the Medical Standards of APSRTC, is contrary to the provisions made under Section 47 of the Disability Act,1995 while considering the similarly situated persons.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Driver in the respondent’s organization regular selection made by the respondent authorities in the year 2001 and in the year 2007 his services were regularized. When he became sick due to ill-health, he was admitted in the hospital, and accordingly he made an application on 27.09.2022 and, accordingly, the 4th respondent has directed to appear before the Senior Medical Officer APSRTC Hospital, at Srikakulam. He appeared and the Senior Medical Officer examined him and declared that medically the petitioner is unfit for A-I Driver Category. But, instead of considering the case of the petitioner for providing alternative employment as per provisions of 47 of Disabilities Act, 1995, the respondents have rejected vide order dated 26.11.2022, without considering his case for alternative appointment questioning the said orders the present writ petition.
3. While, considering the matter for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents has placed latest instructions with regard to providing medical unfit in A.P.Public Transport Department, vide G.O.Ms.No.58 dated 26.12.2025, and on perusal of the said instructions, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner based on the above instructions issued vide G.O.Ms.No.58 dated 26.12.2025 and pass appropriate orders. The said exercise may be completed within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.
______________________________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH 02.02.2026 RMD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 16389/2024
02.02.2026 RMD