Nakkaraboina Saidulu, v. Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd.,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION NO.1834 OF 2019 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for providing employment to his son in place of the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986 and as per the letter dated 30.04.2018 of the 4th respondent.

Heard Sri P. Ravi Shanker, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents.

It has been contended by the petitioner that his lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of Additional Ash Pond for Kothagudem Thermal Power Station, Palonchal Stage-V during 1993 and the State Government had earlier issued G.O.Ms.No.98, dated 15.04.1986 under which the State has taken a policy decision to provide employment to the land losers whose lands were acquired for construction of various projects of the State. The petitioner contends that though he has submitted an application seeking employment under the said G.O., the respondents have not considered his case and, in the meanwhile, he has crossed the age limit for entry into Government service and also he has suffered ill-health and, in those set of circumstances, he has submitted representation dated 04.09.

2017, requesting the respondents to provide employment to his son, but the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation. It is further contended that the 4th respondent, in fact, has recommended to the 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 30.04.

considering the same. Learned counsel, therefore, contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 04.09.2017 and also the recommendations made by the 4th respondent vide proceedings dated 30.04.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had submitted that the case of the petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 04.09.2017 and also the recommendations made by the 4th respondent vide proceedings dated 30.04.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Dated: 1st February, 2019 v v