APHC010150872012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 5454/2012 Between: Ch.k.ramesh Kumar, ...PETITIONER AND The General Manager and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K.S.G. PADMAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N SIVA REDDY The Court made the following Order: The petitioner is challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents in denying a suitable job on compassionate terms. The petitioner’s father was serving the respondent bank as a supervisor and passed away on 12.07.1996 while in service. At that point of time, the deceased employee of the respondent bank left behind his wife, three married daughters, one unmarried daughter and a son. 2. The petitioner and one of his sisters were minors. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the general manger of the 1st respondent bank addressed a letter to the HN, J W.P.No.5454_2012 2 commissioner for corporation, placing the request of the petitioner’s mother to consider accommodating the petitioner on compassionate terms soon after the petitioner attains the age of majority. It is also stated in the said letter that the regulations of the bank would entitle the legal heir of a deceased employee to apply for compassionate appointment within one year from the date of death of the employee. However, in the case of the legal heir falling short of majority by two years, he would be entitled to apply soon after attaining the age of majority. In the present case, the petitioner was falling short by four years to attain the age of majority. As such, the general manger of the 1st respondent requested the commissioner for corporation and the registrar of cooperate societies to accord permission to appoint the applicant after he attained the age of majority (18 years), by relaxing the period of two years. It is submitted that there has been no further communication and that the petitioner has not been considered. 3. The petitioner attained the age of majority in the year 2001. The present writ petition is filed in the year 2012. There is no explanation for the delay and as seen from the pleadings, the petitioner has also completed the MCA course on 01.06.2010. The petitioner should have taken the required steps soon after he HN, J W.P.No.5454_2012 3 attained the age of majority and applied afresh for appointment under compassionate terms. The inaction on the part of the petitioner must be held against the petitioner and there is no explanation for the delayed filing of the present writ petition, which was filed 11 years after attaining the age of majority. The delay and laches on the part of the petitioner in approaching the Courts would not entitle the petitioner to seek compassionate appointment as a matter of fundamental right. 4. With these observations the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 08.01.2025 NKA HN, J W.P.No.5454_2012 4 355 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.5454 of 2012 Date: 08.01.2025 NKA