APHC010080752012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 5146/2012 Between: Rodda Murali The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal Secretary and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M V NARASIMHAM 2. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 5146/2012 ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: V ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): EDUCATION The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3457] DAY OF FEBRUARY ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 Order:- The petitioner is praying for a direction from this Court to the respondents to appoint the petitioner in any suitable post, considering his educational qualifications, in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.113 dated 06.10.2009. 2. The petitioner’s father was working as a Craft Teacher in the 3rd respondent college with effect from 01.04.1985. The petitioner’s father passed away while in service on 28.09.2005. Apart from the petitioner, his mother and younger sister were the dependents of the deceased employee. As on the date of the death of the petitioner’s father, the petitioner was a minor, and soon after attaining the age of majority, the petitioner’s mother filed a representation dated 22.01.2011 seeking compassionate appointment. 3. The 5th respondent, vide proceedings dated 08.03.2011, rejected the case of the petitioner by referring to the ban imposed on filling up aided posts. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per G.O.Ms.No.113, the ban was lifted and the petitioner is entitled for compassionate appointment. 5. The learned Government Pleader for School Education submits that the application seeking employment was made after six years after the demise of the petitioner’s father and that the petitioner has not set out any grounds for compassionate appointment. It is also submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Canara Bank vs. Ajithkumar G.K.1 in Civil Appeal.No.255 of 2025 has laid down certain guidelines. As the petitioner has made out any grounds 1 (2025) SCC 184 3 for consideration for compassionate appointment, a direction from this Court may not be issued in the absence of any pleadings. 6. Heard both the learned counsels. 7. The application seeking compassionate appointment was made by the petitioner on 22.01.2011, and as seen from the said letter, it only refers to the age of the petitioner as on the date of death of the petitioner’s father. The petitioner claimed appointment at the Zilla Parishad Office or Mandal Parishad Office. The conditions set out by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Canara Bank vs Ajithkumar G.K. referred to above, are not seen in the facts of the present case, and the petitioner has not made out any grounds for claiming compassionate appointment as a matter of fundamental right. 8. With these observations, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 13.02.2025 PNS