IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Thursday, the 30th day of September, Two Thousand and Ten PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.709 of 2004 Between: Billa Srinivasa Rao. … Petitioner And The A.P.Power Generation Corporation, rep. By its General Manger and another … Respondents This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.709 of 2004 ORDER: - The grand father of the petitioner, by name, Billa Ramulu held land in different survey numbers of Paloncha Revenue Village in two different occasions, viz., in the years 1963 and 1965. His lands were acquired for the benefit of erstwhile Electricity Board for construction of a Thermal Power Station. The respondents herein succeeded to that in the re-organisation. In addition to payment of compensation, the competent authority introduced the scheme of providing employment to the displaced persons or their dependants. It is in this context that the father of the petitioner, by name, Bikshapathy is said to have been interviewed, but not appointed. The Government to regularise the matter relating to providing employment to displaced families, issued G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project-wing) Department, dated 15.04.1996, prescribing the guidelines. Petitioner submitted representation, dated 20.10.2003, with a request to provide him employment vis-à-vis the acquisition of land in survey No.599 admeasuring Acs.5-12 guntas. Complaining that his representation was not considered, he filed this writ petition. An interim order was passed by this Court on 09.01.2004 directing the respondents to consider the representation. In compliance with the same, the respondents passed an order, dated 13.02.2004, rejecting the claim of the petitioner. W.P.M.P.No.18972 of 2007 is filed with a request to permit the petitioner to amend the prayer by incorporating the plea against the proceedings, dated 13.02.2004. The said application was ordered. Petitioner contends that the view taken by the respondents, viz., that the scheme does not apply to grand children of the land loosers is not correct and that the only relevant factor is to see whether the person claiming the benefit is a dependant upon the person from whom the land was acquired. Respondents filed a counter affidavit and the particulars of the lands that are acquired from the grand father of the petitioner are furnished. It is also stated that as many as three members were provided employment in respect of three different extents and in that view of the matter, the claim of the petitioner cannot be accepted. Heard Sri S.Chandraiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Petitioner is the grand son of the person from whom the land was acquired on two separate occasions in the years 1963 and 1965. He can certainly be treated as a dependant, in case no partition of the family has taken place. For the limited purpose of this writ petition, it can be proceeded on the assumption that the petitioner is dependant upon his grand father Billa Ramulu. In case, the respondents did not provide any employment to Ramulu or his other dependants, the relief claimed by the petitioner deserves consideration. The respondents categorically stated that as many as three persons viz., Billa Narasaiah, Billa Tata Rao from the family of Ramulu and Babu Saheb one of the co-owners of the land in survey No.727/98 along with Billa Narasaiah, were appointed in the years 1987 and 1988 as watchmen. With that the obligation of the respondents under G.O.Ms.No.98, stands discharged. The respondents cannot be expected to provide employment to all the dependants of a person from whom a piece of land is acquired. It is not the case of the petitioner that the persons, who were provided with employment do not belong to the family of Billa Ramulu. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 30th September 2010 lmv