IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 32043 OF 2011 Between: Y. Yasodamma, W/o Late Y.V. Subbanna, aged 40 years, House wife Papagnigar, Lebaka Village, Valluru Mandal, Kadapa District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agricultural and Cooperation Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Kadapa District. 3. The District Cooperative Central Bank, Kadapa, Rep. by its General Manager. 4. The District Cooperative Officer, Kadapa. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue any order or direction or writ or writs more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings Rc. No. Bkg/Estt.lll/Prajavani/2011-12, dated 5.10.2011 of the 3rd respondent is illegal, arbitrary, molafide and violation of the principles of the justice and set a side the consequently i) direct the 3rd respondent to appoint me under the compassionate grounds in any suitable post in the office of the 3rd respondent. may one natural same in the interest of justice and equity and LA. NO: 1 OF 2011 (WPMP. NO: 3977R nr 2011) Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances m support of the writ petition, the High Court J respondent to release the gratuity forthwith pending disposai of the above writ petition in the interest of justice and equity. may be pleased to direct the 3rd < l-A. NO: 1 OF :>014(WPMP NQ; 2msfi np 20141 r" Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pieased to expedite the hearing of the W.P.No.32043 of 2011 by fixing an early date of hearing. ' praying that in the circumstances LA. NO: 2 OF 2014fWPMP Kin- 46001 OF 2014) Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive the proceedings No HRD/M-lll/2014-15 dated 30.10.2014 as a additionai matsriai papers in the above writ petition in the interest of justice and equity of the above writ petitfoTi. ■ Counsel for the PetifionerrSRI MSP KAMARAJU Counsel for the Respondents No.1.2,4; GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Respondent No.3; SRI CHALLA SIVA SHANKAR The Court made the following; ORDER APHC010227862011 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 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No:32043 OF 2011 Between: ...Petitioner Y.Yasodamma AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agricultural and Cooperation Department Secretariat at Hyderabad and three others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M.S.P. Kamaraju Counsel for the Respodents: Ld. Govt. Pleader for Cooperation For R.1 & R.2 Sri Challa Siva Shankar for R-3 The Court made the following order: 1. The petitioner is challenging the proceedings dated 05.10.2011 issued by the third respondent, whereby the third respondent rejected the application of the petitioner for appointment under compassionate grounds. -2- W.P. No.32043 of 2011 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner initially worked as a clerk at Konduru Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society from 01.08.1998 to 30.09.1998 and later worked as an accountant in the said cooperative society from 01.10.1998 to 24.07.2005. Thereafter, he worked as a Secretary at the Vellaturu Primary Agricultural Society from 14.08.2008 to 08/2009. It is submitted that vide proceedings dt.16.10.2009, the husband of the petitioner was posted as a special category Assistant to work at It is submitted that husband of the petitioner thereafter passed away on 17.07.2010. The petitioner, after the demise of her husband, requested the third respondent to pay gratuity and other benefits and also sought for appointment as an Attender under compassionate grounds. The third respondent, vide proceedings dated 05.10.2011, rejected the representation of the petitioner for her appointment under compassionate grounds. As such, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 15618 of 2011 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh challenging the inaction on the part of the third respondent in not releasing the gratuity, petition, vide interim order dated 13.06.2011, the erstwhile High Alamkhanpalli P.A.C.S. In the said writ -3- W.P. No.32043 of 2011 Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the respondents therein to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- towards gratuity to the employees who have already retired from service. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the proceedings dated 30.10.2014 issued by the third respondent, whereby the third respondent had considered the application of one Sri Dhanireddy Ravi Sankara Reddy, the legal heir of one of the employees. The learned counsel submits that the third respondent cannot exhibit different yardsticks while considering the applications for compassionate appointment and the case of the petitioner squarely falls within the domain of the third respondent for passing orders of appointment under compassionate terms. 4. The learned standing counsel for the third respondent submits that the petitioner was not an employee recruited by the third respondent. However, the husband of the petitioner was deputed to work as a special cadre Assistant in the third respondent Bank. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the G.O. Ms. No.67 dt.20.02.2009, wherein it was categorically indicated that decaderization of paid secretaries shall continue as special category Assistants and -4- W.P. No.32043 of 2011 they do not come under the cadre strength of respective District Cooperative Central Banks. The District Cooperative Central Banks shall not count these posts in their cadre strength. It further mentioned in the G.O., that the reverted de- caderised paid secretaries shall retire on attaining the age of superannuation and their posts shall cease to exist from the date. The learned standing counsel for the third respondent further submitted that the husband of the petitioner worked for nine months only. As such, the application of the petitioner cannot be considered for providing employment under the a was compassionate terms. 5. The learned standing counsel also submitted that the service of the husband of the petitioner could not be taken into consideration as the service was not rendered in the cadre strength of the third respondent. Even the services rendered by the husband of the petitioner in P.A.C.S. prior to the decaderization of paid secretaries, the said service would also not be taken into consideration by the third respondent for considering the application of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment, operational guidelines of the Bank would not entitle the It is also submitted that the -5- W.P. No.32043 of 2011 petitioner for any job under any cadre of the third respondent Bank. It is submitted that cases for compassionate appointment would be considered by the third respondent only if the employee of the third respondent-Bank serves the third respondent atleast for a minimum period of five years. 6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after perusing the record, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. The reliance of the petitioner on the proceedings dt.30.10.2014 cannot be followed as a precedent in all cases of applications for consideration of compassionate appointments. In the proceedings dated 30.10.2014, the deceased employee had completed five years of service with the third respondent Bank by the time of his death. As such, the third respondent bank considered it as a fit case. Apart from that, providing employment in compassionate terms would completely depends on the facts of each case and the requirements of the employer. 7. The provision for providing compassionate appointments is a beneficial legislation which is introduced by the employer to ensure the employee's family would be able to tide over the % -6- W.P. No.32043 of 2011 financial difficulty on account of the demise of the breadwinner of the family. Considerable time has passed and the petitioner was also paid the gratuity amount. The claim of the petitioner for a direction to provide a suitable job on compassionate terms cannot be invoked by filing a writ petition as a fundamental right. 8. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 9. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. V Sd/-V.DIWAKAR DEPUTYREGISTRAR 'V //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. One CC to SRI. M. S. P. KAMARAJU, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR COOPERATION, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. One CC to SRI. CHALLA SIVA SHANKAR, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three C.D.Copies nm HIGH COURT DATED:08/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.32043of2011 anoT^ 5 FEB 2025 .. Co Current 6ecuon . ^ -ON o' m DISMISING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS