IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21285 of 2014 Date: 30.07.2014 Between:
Ramavath Jhansi Rani … Petitioner And The High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, For the State of Telangana and the State of A.P., Rep., by its Registrar (Admn), Hyderabad & others.
… Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 21285 of 2014
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao) This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 03.06.2014 in Dis.No.2941/2014, passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the petitioner’s claim to a compassionate appointment on the death of her father on 22.08.2013.
It is the petitioner’s case that her father died on 22.08.2013 when he was working as Junior Assistant in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (for Prohibition and Excise Offences), Nalgonda and her elder brother and sister are no doubt in Government service, but they have been separated from the family. According to the petitioner, the scheme of compassionate appointment under Circular Memo No.60681/Ser.A/2003-1, dated 12.08.2013 provides that if the son, who is employed, is separated from the family, another member of the family may be considered for compassionate appointment.
In the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent the claim of the petitioner is rejected on the ground that the son of the deceased is already in Government service in Central Government. The 2nd respondent has not taken note of the pleading of the petitioner that her brother, who is employed in Government service, is living separately.
In this view of the matter, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment by taking into account the provision in the circular referred to above as to the eligibility of the petitioner.
Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
Date: 30.07.2014 ES