IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.37075 of 2014 BETWEEN Mekka Laxmi and others.
AND ... PETITIONERS The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, (Political) General Administration Department Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. B.H.R. CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR GAD (TG) GP FOR HOME (TG) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioner No.2, who is the son of one Late Mekala Narayana alias Golla Narayana, states that his father was killed by extremists on 26.08.1998 at Kothaguda Shivar of Utnoor Village and Mandal, Adilabad District, which was subject matter of FIR.No.78 of 1998 on the file of PS Utnoor.
2. The petitioners state that the Government introduced a scheme of compassionate appointment to one of the dependants of the family of the victim vide G.O.Ms.No.469, dated 08.11.1996. Subsequently, the Government issued another G.O.Ms.504, dated 11.08.2008, directing the District Collectors to consider such applications for employment from the dependants. The petitioners state that under another G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 21.02.2014, further guidelines were issued, whereunder the District Collectors were authorized to take necessary action and the present scheme provides that if for any reason providing employment is not possible, exgratia of Rs.5,00,000/- is to be paid to the eligible family members of the deceased.
3. Petitioner No.2 filed a representation dated 19.05.2014 before the Collector and District Magistrate, Adilabad District to receive compensation in lieu of employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.50 General Administration (SC.A) Department dated 21.02.2014. However, no action is taken on the said request though the second petitioner has submitted all the relevant documents along with the said application. In the present writ petition, the petitioners claim that they would be satisfied if the compensation in lieu of employment is given.
However, no action on the part of the second respondent in taking any decision on the application of second petitioner compelled them to move the present writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for General Administration appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.3.
5. It is pointed out by learned Government Pleader that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 21.02.2014, if the petitioners are opting for compensation, they need to execute appropriate undertaking to be eligible for exgratia. Learned counsel for the petitioners also states that the petitioners are willing to execute appropriate undertaking, as and when called upon to do so.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to take appropriate decision on the application filed by the second petitioner, referred to above, by taking note of the fact that the petitioners are seeking exgratia, in lieu of employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 21.02.2014, and process the said application and if the petitioners are found eligible, the second respondent shall ask the petitioners to execute appropriate documents to be able to receive exgratia in terms of the scheme, referred to above. Since the incident has occurred almost in 1998, it is imperative that appropriate decision is taken, as directed above, expeditiously, preferably before the end of January, 2015. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J December 3, 2014 DSK