High Court for State of TelanganaWP/27278/2016disposed of no costs

B. Naresh v. The State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

2016-09-06A Ramalingeswara Rao2 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO W.P.No.27278 of 2016

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the letter dated 18.5.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent in not relaxing the Memo dated 21.2.1991 for considering the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds, as arbitrary and illegal. The father of the petitioner worked as Helper in the respondent-TSSPDCL and died on 20.4.1993. The petitioner was aged about two years at that time. When a representation was made by the petitioner's mother, the same was rejected on 27.6.2012 stating that it was not submitted within the stipulated time. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation on 23.09.2014 stating that at the time of death of his father, he was a minor, and since he is now fully qualified and eligible, he sought appointment on compassionate grounds. When the same was not considered, the petitioner filed W.P.No.

35404 of 2014 and this Court vide order dated 21.11.2014 directed the respondents to consider the representation dated 23.09.2014 submitted by the petitioner within a period of six weeks. The 3rd respondent vide letter dated 18.5.2016 rejected the plea of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner filed another representation dated 21.6.2016 seeking relaxation of the Memo dated 21.2.1991 and consideration of his representation. When the same was not considered, the present writ petition is filed.

A perusal of the order dated 18.5.2016 passed by the 3rd respondent shows that the petitioner was aged about two years at the time of death of his father and now, he is aged about 27 years. Appointment on compassionate grounds is a scheme meant for minimizing the difficulties arising on account of sudden death of the employee. No direction can be issued by this Court for consideration of the cases like that of the petitioner after lapse of 25 years.

In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned letter dated 18.5.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO 6th September, 2016 rkk