Komminami Bhanu Prashanth v. The State Of Telangana And 2 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION Nos.20570 of 2020, 28062 of 2019, 28104 of 2019, 1637 of 2020 and 19001 of 2020 COMMON ORDER:

Since the issues raised in these writ petitions are one and the same, all these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No.24570 of 2020 are discussed hereunder :- W.P.No.24570 of 2020 is filed seeking the following relief: "..... to issue a writ, Order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the respondents in issuing the memo vide R.C.No.A1/A2/1319/2008 dated 01.09.2019 and not providing the employment under the compassionate scheme to the petitioner as violative of G.O.Ms.No.469 General Administration (Ser-A) Department dated 08.11.1996 and also Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to provide the employment to petitioner No.1 as per the above GO .....".

Heard Sri B.H.R.Chowdary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

It has been contended by the petitioners that one P.Parvathalu, who is the father of the 1st petitioner and the husband of the 2nd petitioner was killed by the extremists on 24.03.1998 at Dammanapet Village, Wardhannapet Mandal, Warangal District. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had contended that the State Government has taken a policy decision

vide G.O.Ms.No.469 dated 08.11.1996 and G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008, wherein the State Government has taken a policy decision to provide employment to one of the family members, who were killed by the extremists. The petitioners are entitled for employment in terms of the policy of the State Government. But, the respondents are not considering the cases of the petitioners for providing employment in terms of the policy of the State Government.

Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners strictly in terms of G.O.Ms.No.469 dated 08.11.1996 and G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had contended that the petitioners have not made any representations and if only the petitioners submit fresh representations, the cases of the petitioners would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the parties, is of the considered view that these writ petitions can be disposed of directing the petitioners to submit fresh representations to the respondents within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order staking their claim for providing employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.469 dated 08.11.1996 and G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008. Upon such representations being received, the

respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 28.10.2021 Prv