IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11609 of 2000 Between: V Atchinnaidu S/o Late Sri V Ramulu Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Registrar Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Purana Haveli, Hyderabad 2 The Principal Secretary to Government of A.P. Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 3 The Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration Govt. of A.P. Sri BRKR Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad-500022 4 The Regional Director cum Appellate Commissioner of Municipal Administration T.S.R. Complex, 2nd Floor, Visakhapatnam-530001 5 The Commissioner Vizianagaram Municipality Vizianagaram District-531202 6 The Chair - Person Vizianagaram Municipality Vizianagaram District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ order or directions to declare the orderdt. 7/9/1999 passed in O.A.No. 5576 of 1997 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and the Memo No. 26328/L3/95-2 M.A. dt. 3/1/1997 issued by the 2nd Respondent herein as illegal, arbitary, unreasonable void and violative of ARticle 14 of teh Cosntitution of India besides being contrary to the material available on record and consequentially direct the Respondents herein to appoint the petitioner herein as Junior Assistant with retrospective effect i.e., from 24/6/1983 with all cosequential benefits including monetory benefits and seniority and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MUK} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY W.P.No.11609 of 2000 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Swaroop Reddy) In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the order dated 07-09- 1999, passed in O.A.No.5576 of 1997. . 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as T.B. Watcher on compassionate grounds, on retirement of his father from service on medical invalidation. His grievance is that in spite of there being vacancies of Junior Assistants and he was fully eligible and qualified for the said post, he was appointed as T.B. Watcher instead of Junior Assistant. After his several representations, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.558 M.A., dated 26-05-1990, directing the 5th respondent-Commissioner, Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram, to appoint him as Junior Assistant with immediate effect and he was accordingly promoted to that post of Junior Assistant. Again the petitioner made several representations to the 2nd respondent to consider his service as Junior Assistant with effect from 24-06-1983. The 2nd respondent, vide Memo No.26328/L3/95-2, dated 03-01-1997, rejected the request of the petitioner. Challenging the said orders, the petitioner filed the impugned O.A.No.5576 of 1997 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, seeking direction to the respondents to appoint him as Junior Assistant with retrospective effect i.e. from 24-06-1983. 3. Before the Tribunal, he contended that subsequent to his appointment, three persons were appointed on the same compassionate grounds for the post of Junior Assistant, whereas, he was not considered for the same. The Tribunal dismissed the said O.A. holding that since the petitioner has accepted his appointment as T.B. Watcher, he is estopped from seeking any other relief like appointment for the post of L.D.C. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is fully qualified for the appointment of Junior Assistant, but in spite of that, he was appointed in Class-IV post as T.B.Watcher. He further contends that subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner, on compassionate grounds, three persons were appointed as Junior Assistants directly, therefore, the claim of the petitioner that he should have been promoted from 24-06-1983 may be considered. 5. As already referred to, the petitioner was subsequently promoted to the post of Junior Assistant in view of the orders issued in G.O.Rt.No.558 M.A., dated 26-05-1990, on the basis of his representations, and hence, his claim that he should have been promoted from 24-06-1983, i.e. the date of his appointment, is totally untenable. Appointments on compassionate grounds are made to grant reliefs to bereaved family to save the family members from starvations etc. and persons, who have been appointed on compassionate grounds, cannot ask for any particular post based on their better qualifications. Further more, once they accepted such a post, they cannot claim again any other better post. The contention that the persons, who were subsequently appointed on compassionate grounds were given L.D.C. posts, also would not come to the rescue of the petitioner, as the petitioner has accepted the appointment that was given to him and joined the same. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________________ JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH ___________________________ 23rd July 2009 JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY Kvr