IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 14360 of 2000 Between: Abdul Waheeb, S/o Hassan Ali, R/o 1-7-41, Premnagar, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Mahabubnagar Region. 3 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Depot Manager, Narayanpet Depot. .....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 Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by calling all records from the respondents by declaring the impugned proceedings No.LC1/876(41)98-RM-MBNR dt. 3.11.98 in rejecting the case of petitioner for providing employment to his son in any suitable post under the provisions of 30% quote to the employees children retired on superannuation/medical grounds on the ground that the circular No.217/98 dt.27.2.98 which stipulates the cancellation of provision of 30% quote to the employees children retired on Superannauation etc., except to the sons/spouse of employees died in harness is untenable in law, facts arbitrary, unjust, illegal contrary to law, in violation of principles of natural justice and also in Violation of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for providing employment to his son in any suitable post as per the circulars in force as on the date of his retirement i.e. 10.12.90 in the interest of justice and to pass such other or further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRIDHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following: ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the proceedings No.LC1/876(41)/98-RM:MBNR dated 03-11-1998, issued in terms of Circular No.217/98 dated 27-02-1998, by which the claim of the petitioner for appointment of his son in a suitable post was rejected. The claim of the petitioner is that he voluntarily retired from service in the respondent-Corporation on medical grounds and in view of the separate quota for providing employment to the children of its employees who retired on superannuation/medical grounds, his son is entitled for appointment in a suitable post in the respondent-Corporation. Here it is to be noted that such quota was already struck down by this Court and circular instructions were issued on 27-02-1998. Since the very quota prescribed is struck down by this Court, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner is entitled for any monitory beneﬁt under such scheme, it is open for him to claim such benefit by filing a separate application. With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------- R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th September 2008 CVRK