IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.No.25883 of 2003 Between: D.Amanullah … Petitioner And The Joint Collector, Kurnool and another … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.25883 of 2003 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings dated 09.12.2003 issued by the 1st respondent, Joint Collector, as illegal, arbitrary. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that his father was working in the respondent’s bank and died while in service on 07.02.2002. Pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner, the 1st respondent issued conditional appointment orders dated 18.09.2003, which reads as under: “On 5-9-2003 a conditional appointment resolution was passed by the Joint Collector, Kurnool/Person-in-charge of the bank on compassionate grounds following the death of your father Sri D.Abdul Rasool. As per the condition stipulated in the appointment resolution you have to clear all the loans availed and which are pending with the bank in your father’s name and also in the names of other members of your family, like your mother and your uncles etc. You are hereby informed that if you do not clear off the following entire loans which are pending with the bank within (3) three months from 8-9- 2003, your appointment utomatically gets cancelled.” As the petitioner was in need of immediate job, as no earning member was there in his family, he accepted the said conditional appointment order. As the petitioner did not comply with the conditions stipulated in the conditional appointment order, the 1st respondent issued impugned order dated 09.12.2003 terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had violated the conditional appointment order dated 18.09.2003. Questioning the same, the present writ petition has been filed on the ground that there should be conditional compassionate appointment only with regard to the age and educational qualifications as provided under the service law but not with regard to the debts. Though the matter is of the year 2003, no counter has been filed and this Court granted interim suspension of the impugned order on 12.12.2003. From a perusal of the record, it is obvious that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds on the condition that the petitioner should clear of all the loans availed by his father and which are pending with the bank in the name of the petitioner’s father and also in the names of other members of his family, like petitioner’s mother and his uncles etc., within three months from 08.09.2003. As the petitioner did not clear of the loans, the impugned order was issued, terminating the services of the petitioner, which reads as under: “You were appointed on 5-9-2003 as Clerk in the bank with a condition attached that you should clear off all the loans obtained from the bank by your late father Sri D.Abdul Rasool and his family members with in three months from 8-9- 2003. Though the said period elapsed, you have not paid any amount towards re-payment as per the conditions laid down in the earlier resolution cited in the reference 1 above. Since, there is violation of the condition of appointment, your services are hereby terminated with effect from 9- 12-2003, as per orders of the Joint Collector, Kurnool/Person-in-charge of the bank dated 3-12-2003.” Making of an appointment under compassionate grounds is a matter of policy decision governed with certain rules and regulations. Admittedly, pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner, he was appointed as a Clerk under compassionate grounds considering him as he is the son of the deceased employee of the respondents. Such appointments shall not be subjected with such conditions except considering the eligibility etc. The respondents have not filed any counter justifying for incorporation of such conditions, which are not permissible under law. Therefore, I am of the view that the impugned order, terminating the services of the petitioner, is illegal and liable to be set aside. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 09.12.2003 is set aside. However, this order does not come in the way of the respondents in taking appropriate action, in accordance with law, with regard to recovery of the amounts, in respect of the loans obtained by the father of the petitioner. Further, certainly recovery of the loan amount obtained by the father of the petitioner shall not come in the way of appointment of the petitioner under compassionate grounds. Accordingly, for the above reasons, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH Date: 09-04-2010 LSK