APHC010166532023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8587/2023 Between: N. Noorbasha ...PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V. VENKATA MAYUR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) 2. G.P. FOR SERVICES-II The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “to issue a Writ, Order, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner and to pass….” 2. Heard Sri V.Venkata Mayur, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-II appearing 2 CGR, J. W.P.No.8587 of 2023 for respondent No.1 and Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC, appearing for respondents 2 to 4. 3. Petitioner’s father while working as Conductor in APSRTC, died in harness on 15.05.1992, leaving behind the petitioner besides his mother and sister. Petitioner is stated to be minor then and so, on attaining majority, he made application for providing compassionate appointment. In pursuance to the same, the respondents have issued call letter, dated 24.08.2016 calling upon the petitioner to attend interview scheduled to be held on 02.09.2916. Petitioner appeared for the said interview. But, however, there was no further communication from the respondents as to the outcome of the same. Surprisingly, petitioner got yet another call letter, dated 22.08.2019 from 3rd respondent calling upon him to attend for interview scheduled to be held on 28.08.2019, even for that petitioner appeared, however, there was no communication from the respondents. After merger of respondents-Corporation with the State Government by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 12.07.2022, all pending applications for compassionate appointments were forwarded to 4th respondent, who is stated to be competent authority. Petitioner has made several representations, dated 25.07.2022, 08.12.2022 and 24.03.2023 requesting respondents 3 and 4 to consider his case for 3 CGR, J. W.P.No.8587 of 2023 compassionate appointment. However, the respondents have not taken any decision, thereby petitioner preferred the present writ petition. 4. Respondents 2 to 4 filed counter-affidavit raising various factual aspects and tried to justify why the application of petitioner has not been considered. But, strangely, learned Standing Counsel for respondents-Corporation on 03.09.2024 has brought to the notice of this Court that the case of the petitioner had already been considered by passing appropriate speaking orders and sought time to produce the same. Relevant portion of the order, dated 03.09.2024, reads as under: “This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s father died in harness on 15.05.1992. He would submit that the respondent authorities issued call letter on 28.04.2016 under Bread Winner scheme and another call letter was also issued on 22.08.2019 and even though the petitioner appeared before the Committee, no order is passed. Sri K. Viswanadham, learned standing counsel would submit that speaking orders were passed and seeks to produce the same.” 5. On consequent hearings on 21.10.2024 and 07.03.2025, further time was sought. But, today, it is stated that no such order has been passed. 4 CGR, J. W.P.No.8587 of 2023 6. Since the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in terms of the applications made is admittedly pending with the respondents, and now after merger of respondents Corporation with State Government, the claims are to be decided by the 4th respondent District Collector, the 3rd respondent is directed to forward the application of the petitioner to the 4th respondent, who in turn, is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in pursuance to the petitioner’s applications, dated 25.07.2022, 08.12.2022 and 24.03.2023, and pass appropriate speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:08.04.2025. cs