IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18324 of 2004 Between: Saddi Sukumara Reddy, S/o Late Sri.Samba Reddy, R/o LIG 46/8, APHB Colony, Nakkalagutta, Hanamkonda, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P.Road Transport Corporation, Musheerabad, Hyderabad 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.Road Transport Corporation, Torrur Depot, Warangal District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in respondent-corporation under the Bread Winner Scheme in any suitable job. Counsel for the Petitioner: MS.K.VANI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Smt P.Rajini, Standing Counsel for APSRTC . The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims that he is the son of Samba Reddy, employee of the respondent-Corporation. The said Samba Reddy died on 2-1-2002 while in service. The petitioner submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent on 23-1-2002 for financial assistance and later on 21-3-2002 submitted a representation to consider and to provide employment under bread winner scheme to any one of the members of the family. The petitioner contends that he is qualified to hold any post that is likely to be offered by the respondents. But the respondents so far did not pass any order on the representation made by the petitioner’s mother and himself. The petitioner therefore approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint him to the suitable post under the bread winner scheme. The petitioner is contending that the representations made by them on 21-3-2002, 7- 9-2002 and 16-7-2003 are pending with the 2nd respondent. Therefore, it would be appropriate, if a direction is given to the 2nd respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner and his mother and pass appropriate orders regarding their request for appointment of the petitioner to a suitable post under the bread winner scheme. In the light of the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representations of the petitioner and his mother and pass appropriate orders according to the existing rules regarding the request of the petitioner for appointment under the breadwinner scheme within a period of eight weeks from today. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________ 8-10-2004 rkk To 1 The Managing Director, A.P.Road Transport Corporation, Musheerabad, Hyderabad 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.Road Transport Corporation, Torrur Depot, Warangal District 3 Two CD copies.