Mohd. Mahaboob Pasha v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.19044 of 2009 ORDER:

Heard Sri K.Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.Ravi Babu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

The petitioner claims to be the son of one Mohammad Abbas, who was working as Helper in the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (formerly the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation) and died on 27.11.2000 while in service. According to the petitioner, few schemes are operated by the respondent-Corporation for providing employment to the eligible legal heir of the deceased employee. In this factual background, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs:

i) declaring the action of the respondents in not providing employment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds as illegal and arbitrary;

ii) consequently direct the respondents to provide employment to the petitioner either as Helper or Shramik or Attender or Conductor or any other suitable post on compassionate grounds.

At request of Sri A.Ravi Babu, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, the writ petition was adjourned from 29.02.2016 to till date, to get instructions on the present stage of consideration of the petitioner's case.

Learned Standing Counsel places on record proceedings No.E3/684(1)2013-RM-ADB dated 25.09.2013, medical reports dated 25.06.2014, 25.09.2014 and 26.02.2016 and contends that it cannot be said that there is inaction on the part of the respondents in considering the case of the petitioner for suitable employment. He further contends

that the petitioner neither is qualified in the medical test nor possessed the requisite qualifications.

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, however submits that in the letter bearing No.E3/684(1)2013-RM-ADB dated 26.02.2016 addressed by respondent No.2 to the State Minority Commission, it is stated that the case of the petitioner is under consideration and the Corporation would pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I have perused the material available on record and also the letter dated 26.02.2016 and I am satisfied that the inaction complained by the petitioner is without merit and therefore, the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for suitable employment as stated in the letter dated 26.02.

2016 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court directs only consideration and disposal of the recommendation as stated in the letter dated 26.02.2016 but not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and it is for the respondent-Corporation to decide the matter in accordance with law. With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________ S.V. BHATT, J Date: 14.03.2016 pab