IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 15649 of 2008 Between: 1 Govt. of A.P.,rep. by its Secretary to Govt. Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Dept., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 The Zilla Parishad, Khammam, Rep. by its Chief, Executive Officer, Khammam. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND M.V.Muralikrishna S/o. Late M.V.Krishna Rao Dendukuru, Madhira Mandal Parishad, Khammam Distirct. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of " Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon'ble A.P.Admn.Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in O.A.No. 1/2000 dated 30.10.2003 as being erroneous, illegal and unreasonable and quash the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P. No :15649 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: (per GHULAM MOHAMMED, J) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to quash orders dated 30-10- 2003 in O.A.No.1/2000 on the ﬁle of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad ( for short “the Tribunal”). 2. It is the case of the petitioners that father of the respondent herein, namely, Sri M.V.Krishna Rao died in harness on 15-06-1976, while working as Teacher under the control of the Zilla Praja Parishad, Khammam. Thereafter, the respondent applied for compassionate appointment after becoming major on 31.08.1987 i e. after expiry of 11 years from the date of demise of his father. Based on the said application, the then District Collector, Khammam, appointed the respondent herein as an Attender vide Proceedings Rc.No.A2/2053/87, dated 14.09.1987 subject to relaxation of the Rules relating to the time limit prescribed for making application seeking appointment and proposals were sent to the Government for relaxation. Subsequently, the Government issued instructions vide Memo dated 08-02-1989 terminating the services of the respondent, as the rules cannot be relaxed in favour of the respondent. The District Collector, Khammam, sent proposals from time to time for relaxation of conditions, but ultimately, the Government vide their Memo No.41156/E.V/A3/96-4 dated 04-03-1998 issued instructions to terminate the respondent from service. Accordingly, orders were issued in Rc.No.A2/2053/87, dated 23.07.1998. Aggrieved by the said orders, the respondent ﬁled O.A.No.1 of 2000 before the Tribunal and the same was allowed by setting aside the termination orders dated 23-07-1998. Against the said orders, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the Tribunal ought to have seen that as per rules governing the compassionate appointment, an application for compassionate appointment shall be made within one year from the date of death of deceased Government Servant. He also contended that in the instant case since the respondent has made application seeking compassionate appointment after expiry of 11 years, order of appointment of the respondent herein was irregular and was liable to be cancelled. He further contended that the Tribunal ought to have seen that the order of appointment of the respondent was subject to relaxation of time limit of one year by the Government and the Tribunal erred in observing that the Government issued orders after a long lapse of time on the proposal of the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, Zilla Parishad, Khammam. He also further contended that the Tribunal failed to notice that time and again, the Government rejected the proposals of the then Chief Executive Oﬃcer, Zilla Parishad. Therefore, he prays to set-aside the impugned order. 4. It is the case of the respondent that he is an Attender under the management of Zilla Parishad, Khammam. The grievance of the respondent is that the proposed action of the Zilla Parishad, Khammam for cancellation of his appointment orders in their Order dated 23-07-1998 in pursuance of the orders issued by the ﬁrst petitioner dated 4-3-1998 is arbitrary. The respondent assailed these orders before the Tribunal on the grounds that the proposals for relaxation were submitted by the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, Zilla Parishad in September,1987 itself and ﬁrst petitioner did not issue any orders for a period of nearly more than 10 ½ years . Had the Government been of the view that the respondent ought to be terminated from service they should have issued the orders much earlier, so that the respondent would have been enabled to seek any alternative appointment. The Tribunal after taking into consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case allowed the O.A. ﬁled by the respondent. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material available on record. 6. As a matter of fact, the respondent’s father died on 15-6-1976, while working as Teacher under the Management of Zilla Parishad. As seen from the appointment orders issued on 14-9-1987 by the Zilla Parishad, the respondent ﬁled his application on 29-8-1987 and after taking into consideration the relevant rules governing as on that date and keeping in view the ﬁnancial condition of the respondent, he was appointed as Attender subject to certain conditions. It is also seen that this court issued orders in WPMP No.27429 of 1998 in W.P.No.22794 of 1998 on 19-08-1998 directing the petitioners to continue the respondent in service as Attender until further orders. 7. The Tribunal keeping in view the principles of equity and law laid down, held that such persons whose appointments were found to be irregular and contrary to rules, shall be continued in service without their services being terminated only on the ground of irregularity. The Tribunal further held that since the respondent having been appointed subject to relaxation by the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, Zilla Parishad in the year 1987 and continued so far, he shall not be disturbed and the proposed order of the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, Zilla Parishad terminating his services is bad in law and it cannot be sustained. 8. We have perused the impugned order and we do not ﬁnd any inﬁrmity so as to call for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and moreover, this writ petition is ﬁled after the lapse of ﬁve years of passing of the impugned order. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J 22-07-2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI}