IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9444 of 2008 Between: T. Varalaxmi Alias B. Pallavi, W/o. Late B. Jangaiah, R/o. H.No. 18-6-909, Gowlipura Outside, Balagunj, Hyderabad ... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Regional manager, Jubilee Bus Station, Picket, Secunderabad. 2 A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Depot Manager, Falaknuma Depot, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass an appropriate Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to appoint the Petitioner as a regular conductor. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.R.BALACHARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : O R D E R: The husband of the petitioner died, while in service of the APSRTC. She made an application to the respondents, for appointing her on compassionate ground. On considering the application, the 1st respondent appointed the petitioner and certain others, on compassionate ground, on contract basis. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is entitled to be appointed on regular basis, and that though three years have elapsed, the respondents have still continuing her on contract basis. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of uncertainty prevailing in the matter, the very purpose of appointing the petitioner is being defeated. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the Government has imposed ban on regular appointments in the Corporation, and that appointments for the posts of Conductors, Drivers, etc. also being made on contract basis. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground, as a conductor, on contract basis. Her grievance is that she is not being appointed on regular basis. In view of the ban imposed by the Government on the regular appointments in the Corporation, all engagements or appointments, be it of conductors or drivers, are on contract basis. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim any superior rights over the candidates, who are appointed after selection. This much, however, can be said that as and when the Corporation takes steps to appoint the existing contract workers, on casual or regular basis, the case of the petitioner shall also be considered. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the petitioner shall be extended the same benefit, as is extended to those who are appointed on contract basis contemporarily, along with the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 28th April 2008 PAN