THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION NO.17705 OF 2004 Date: 07.09.2011 Between: Mudam Kistaiah …..Petitioner And The General Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad and others …..Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION NO.17705 OF 2004 ORDER: The petitioner has filed this writ petition wherein he has prayed for a direction to be issued to the respondents to appoint his son viz., M.Ganesh as a Sweeper-cum-Peon under compassionate grounds. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined in the bank service on 6.1.1964 as a Peon and worked upto 31.3.2001 as Head Peon. On 28.11.2000, as per the directions of the third respondent officials, the petitioner went to the post office to drop letters of the third respondent’s office. While he was returning back to the bank, when he reached Indira Chowk, Kamareddy, one lorry bearing No.ATG 72 being driven in a rash and negligent manner came behind and dashed against the petitioner, as a result of which, the petitioner fell down and the lorry ran over his right leg. The petitioner was immediately shifted to the Government hospital, Kamareddy where the doctors amputated his right leg and the petitioner became disabled. 3. The petitioner has averred that he has taken voluntary retirement on 31.3.2001 due to amputation of his leg in the accident. He submitted representations to the respondent No.2 to appoint his son in any suitable post in his place under compassionate appointment scheme. Numerous representations were sent to the respondent No.2 and one of them being on 5.11.2001, but the same has not been considered. 4. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner suffered amputation of leg in the alleged accident while on duty and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get appointment for his son on compassionate grounds and the bank authorities should consider his representation dated 5.11.2001. 5. None appeared on behalf of the respondents. 6. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it is averred that the petitioner sought voluntary retirement and all the retiral dues have already been paid to him. It is further averred that the representation of the petitioner dated 5.11.2001 was duly considered and the same was rejected vide letter No.F/5/513 dated 12.12.2003 wherein it has been stated that the compassionate appointment is not applicable to the employees who retired under Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001. It is the further case of the respondents that compassionate appointment under medical grounds applicable only to the employees who are compelled to leave the bank’s service before attaining the age of 55 years due to incapacitation by virtue of accidents or serious ailments like Paralysis, Cancer, Blindness etc., whereas the petitioner has crossed the age of 55 years as on the date of retirement i.e. on 31.03.2001. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the counter filed by the respondents, it is clear that the representation dated 5.11.2001 filed by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 12.12.2003. The petitioner states that he never received the copy of the said order and the same has been duly mentioned in the reply. Therefore, the petitioner ought to have challenged the aforementioned order. Hence, his plea that his representation be decided cannot be accepted because the same already stands decided vide order dated 12.12.2003. In view of the above, the prayer of the petitioner to consider his representation dated 5.11.2001 cannot be accepted. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order vide which his representation for giving compassionate appointment to his son has been rejected. No costs. ________________________________ JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA 7th September, 2011 Tjmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION NO.17705 OF 2004 DATE: 07.09.2011