APHC010600852014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: Between: Mekala Ayyaswamy P Samuel Died Per Lrs and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J U M V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MURALI LINCOLN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3365] MONDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 4366/2014 ...PETITIONER AND P Samuel Died Per Lrs and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: J U M V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): MURALI LINCOLN [3365] THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 The Court made the following Order: Learned counsel on both sides are present. 2. Heard. 3. Perused the record. 4. Sri P.Samuel was indebted to Sri Mekala Ayyaswamy, that resulted in O.S.No.536 of 2011. During the pendency of the suit, the debtor died and his legal representatives were impleaded to represent the estate of the deceased debtor. Finally a decree was passed as against the estate of the deceased lying in the hands of the legal representatives. 5. The decree remained outstanding forcing the decree holder to move E.P.No.138 of 2014 under Order 21 R.48 C.P.C seeking for attachment of salary of Kum. Saritha who is the daughter of the deceased debtor. Before the Executing Court, the D.Hr raised the contention that, Kum. Saritha was given employment on compassionate grounds on the death of her father P.Samuel and therefore decree could be executed against her as the employment is to be considered as estate of the deceased. The objection was raised on behalf of Kum. Saritha stating that it is only a decree against estate of the deceased and not a personal 3 decree and therefore it could not be executed against her. After a detailed consideration of rival submissions, finding that the decree is only against estate of late Samuel, if any in the hands of J.Drs.2 to 4 and since D.Hr., did not prove any estate of deceased Samuel lying in the hands of J.Dr.No.3, he was not entitled for attachment of salary of J.Dr.No.3, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool dismissed the execution petition by order dated 28.08.2014. 6. Aggrieved by it, the Decree Holder preferred this Revision petition. 7. The contentions that were raised before the Executing Court are re-agitated here. 8. The only question that falls for consideration is: Whether the daughter being given appointment on compassionate grounds could she be stated to have been in possession of the estate of the deceased. 9. The petitioner’s contentions cannot be considered for the following reasons: 4 The right to compete for employment as enshrined in Article 16 of the Constitution of India is the right vested with every competent citizen. On death of an employee a public employment cannot be succeeded by his predecessors. As a measure of social welfare, with a view to enable the members of the bereaved family to come out of the stress and financial constraints schemes are made available where under one or the other eligible family members could be given appointment on compassionate grounds. Appointment on compassionate grounds is not a matter of statutory right. At any rate a debt on pronote after being adjudicated would translate itself into a decree against person and on his death it becomes decree against his estate. 10. Since public employment is nobody’s estate, Kum. P.Sartitha could not be said to have succeeded the estate of her late father. Therefore, the view taken by the Executing Court is in accordance with law. Therefore, this Court finds that there is no illegality in it and hence no interference is called for. 13. Therefore, this revision is dismissed making it clear that it is well within the competence of the D.Hr to explore the further 5 modes through which the decree could be executed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal Petition, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR, J Date:10.03.2025 KKV 6 17 THE HON’BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4366 of 2014 Date:10.03.2025 KKV 7