Mrs. K. Jaya Lakshmi v. The Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION NO.2636 OF 2011 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:

"... to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not providing employment to the 2nd petitioner under deceased employees quota as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to appoint the 2nd petitioner to any suitable employment as per his educational qualifications..."

2. Heard Mr. Peeta Raman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.Aravala Rama Rao, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent corporation.

3. According to the petitioners, the 1st petitioner is the wife and the 2nd petitioner is the son of one K.C.Prabhakar Reddy. The said Prabhakar Reddy passed away on 20-02-2004 while working as Mechanic in the respondent corporation. It is further stated in the writ affidavit that the petitioners made a representation in the month of April, 2004 to the respondent corporation requesting to provide employment on compassionate ground, but the respondent corporation did not take any action. It is also the case of the petitioners herein that since all the efforts proved to be futile, they approached local M.L.A., who addressed a letter, dated 17-08-2009, recommending the case of the 2nd petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground.

4. A counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents, denying the submission of representation by the petitioner in the month of April, 2004. It is stated in the said counter-affidavit that local M.L.A. addressed a letter, dated 17-08-2009, requesting the respondent corporation to provide employment to the 2nd petitioner on compassionate ground and the said request could not be considered in view of ban on compassionate appointment.

5. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned standing counsel for the respondent corporation that now the ban is lifted by the respondent corporation and the respondent corporation may be directed to take appropriate action. In view of the same, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent corporation to consider the case of the 2nd petitioner herein for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with law by fixing some time frame.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent corporation to take appropriate action for providing compassionate appointment to the 2nd petitioner herein in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

____________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J DATED: 19-11-2015 Hsd