Ponugoti Kausalya v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.23705 of 2019

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: ".....to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing the employment under the scheme of compassionate to one of the family members basing on the application dated 17.6.2019 for the death of husband of petitioner No.1 in extremists violence (Naxalites) as per G.O.Ms.No.504 General Administration (Ser-A) Department, dated 11.08.2008 read with sub clause of (b) of clause (2) in section 4 of the Telangana (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act, 1994 (Act No.

2, 1994) as arbitrary, illegal and also violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner No.3 for providing the employment as per G.O.Ms. No.504 General Administration (Ser-A) Department, dated 11.08.2008 read with relevant provisions to Petitioner No.3 or to pass such any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice." Heard Sri B.H.R.Choudary, learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for General Administration appearing for the respondents.

It is the case of the 1st petitioner that her husband was killed by the extremists on 18.09.1992 and the State Government has taken a policy decision vide G.O.Ms.No.469, dated 08.11.1996 and G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 21.02.2014 to provide employment to the dependants of the deceased, who were killed by the extremists. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner and her son, who is the 2nd petitioner, made a representation dated 10.11.2008 requesting the respondents to provide employment to the 3rd petitioner (daughter of the 2nd

petitioner) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.469, dated 08.11.1996 and G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 21.02.2014. But, the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation nor considered the case of the 3rd petitioner for appointment in any suitable post. Therefore, it is prayed that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners on 10.11.2008.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents contended that the case of the 3rd petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed on the representation submitted by the petitioners.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners on 10.11.2008 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Date: 30.10.2019 rkk