K. Naveen Kumar v. The State Of Telangana And 4 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.14112 of 2019 ORDER:

This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both parties.

2.

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as VRA, Degaon Village, Bhainsa Mandal, on compassionate ground in place of his deceased father, who was expired on 10.11.2017 while he was in service working as VRA, Degaon Village, Bhainsa Mandal, Adilabad/Nirmal District, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to law and sought a consequential direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as VRA, Degaon Village, Bhainsa Mandal, Nirmal District, on compassionate ground in place of his father, who died while he was in service. 3.

Heard Sri N. Srushman Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-II. 4.

It has been contended by the petitioner that his father was employed as VRA in Degaon Village, Bhainsa Mandal and while he was discharging his duties, he has expired on 10.11.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted representations to the respondents, dated 28.11.2017, 20.02.2019 and 08.03.2019, requesting the respondents to appoint him as VRA on compassionate grounds. But, so far the respondents neither passed any orders on the said representations nor

considered the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner, dated 28.11.2017. 20.02.2019 and 08.03.2019, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the case of the petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed on the representations submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.

6.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representations, dated 28.11.2017, 20.02.2019 and 08.03.2019, of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 10th July 2019 mar