IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 1894 of 2009 Between: P.Jayapal Rao S/o.P.Govind Rao R/o.Korapalli Village, Jammigunta Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally Road, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar - 505 001. 3 The Joint Collector, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar - 505 001. .....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 to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for records in O.A.No.1425 of 2006 dated 13.9.2006 on the file of A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and by quashing the same allow the O.A. as prayed for and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO :1894 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Ghulam Mohammed, J) 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.9.2006 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1425 of 2006. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed the above O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering his case for appointment to the post of Village Secretary on par with the similarly situated persons, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents to consider his case for appointment to the said post. 3. Earlier, the petitioner filed O.A.No.1204 of 2001 seeking appointment as Village Administrative Officer under compassionate grounds and the same was disposed of by order dated 1.3.2001 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner along with others for appointment as Village Administrative Officer as per his eligibility, suitability and Rules. Since his case for the post of Village Secretary was not considered by the respondents, he filed the present O.A. 4. Before the Tribunal, the plea of the petitioner was that his father worked as Village Administrative Officer and he died on 12.12.1997 and therefore, he is entitled for consideration for appointment to the post of Village Administrative Officer. The respondents filed counter contending that the petitioner’s father was not in service at the time of abolition of the posts of Village Officers, i.e. 6.1.1984 and therefore, the appointment of the petitioner for the post of Village Administrative Officer would not arise. After hearing the matter, the Tribunal has dismissed the O.A. Challenging the O.A., this writ petition has been filed. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is fully qualified to be considered for the post of Village Administrative Officer on par with other similarly placed persons and that non-consideration of his candidature for the said post amounts to depriving his livelihood, which is violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is seeking the post of Village Administrative Officer on compassionate grounds on the ground that his father worked as Village Administrative Officer and that he died on 12.12.1997, but the petitioner’s father was not in service on 6.1.1984 i.e. at the time of abolition of the posts of Village Officers. Further, as against the impugned order dated 13.09.2006, the writ petition is filed after a lapse of nearly 2½ years. 7. A major criterion while appointing a person on compassionate grounds should be the financial condition of the family the deceased person left behind. Unless the financial condition is entirely penury, such appointments cannot be made. The O.A. was filed contending that similarly placed persons were appointed and his case was not considered. But, as referred above, the petitioner’s case is on different footing. His father was not in service on 6.1.1984 at the time of abolition of the posts of Village Officers. 8. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity so as to call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J ________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J 05-02-2009 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}