THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY W.P.No.20694 of 2003 N. Chandramma ….Petitioner vs. Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupathi, Chittoor District, represented by it’s Registrar and another. …..Respondents. O R D E R: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner more particularly by way of writ of mandamus, seeking direction to the respondents’ university for considering the claim of the petitioner for employment under compassionate appointment. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s husband was working as a ‘cleaner’ in the college hostels, run by Sri Venkateswara University at Tirupathi and while in service he died on 6.12.1991. This writ petition is filed in the year 2003, seeking direction for appointment on compassionate grounds. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that as per the scheme which is in force for extending benefit of appointment on compassionate grounds, the applications for appointment shall be filed within a period of one year from the date of occurrence of the death of the employee. In this case, even according to the petitioner, the application was moved nearly after six years from the date of death of the employee and even the said claim was rejected as early as on 31.10.2000 in proceedings R.O.C.No.E.I(3)/2000. Even the said rejection has become final and the said order is not questioned and in spite of rejection of the application, this writ petition is filed in 2003, seeking writ mandamus to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment. The very scheme for compassionate appointments is intended to help the bereaved family, where there-being no earning member in the family, having regard to the urgent necessities to render help to the members of the family, immediately after the employee dies but however when the scheme itself provides the period of prescription of time of one year for making claims for such appointment, by making an application, nearly after lapse of six years, the petitioner cannot claim any appointment on compassionate grounds. Moreover, the petitioner has not questioned the rejection, which was made on 31.10.2000. In that view of the matter, no further direction can be issued at this stage to consider her claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ------------------------------------ JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY 16th December 2004 BCS