THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.21758 OF 2003 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. The husband of the petitioner by name V.Jayanna joined in the service of the respondent company – Central Power Distribution company of A.P. Ltd in the year 1970 and worked as Instrument Mechanic 1st Grade under the Control of the 4th respondent – The Divisional Engineer of the Company at Kurnool and died on 6.6.1995 while in service. As the ﬁrst wife of the deceased died, he married the petitioner. The son of the ﬁrst wife ﬁled W.P.No.15218/1996 on the ﬁle of this court seeking compassionate appointment and this court dismissed the writ petition on 22.12.1999 on the ground that the family pension has been sanctioned by proceedings dated 21.11.1995. When the petitioner sought appointment on compassionate grounds, by proceedings in Memo No.DS(Per)/AS/(Estt)POF/F-559/2003 dated 4.6.2003, the 2nd respondent Deputy Secretary (Personnel) of the Company, refused to provide appointment on compassionate grounds on the ground that she was provided with family pension. The grievance of the petitioner is that neither the family pension has been implemented nor she was provided with any employment on compassionate grounds and, therefore, she seeks a direction to the respondent to provide her appointment on compassionate grounds to the post of Sweeper-cum-Gardener. 3. The respondent ﬁled counter aﬃdavit and the tenor of the aﬃdavit is to the eﬀect that the petitioner has been provided with alternative pension scheme vide memo.No.DP/DM(RNT)/1475- G1/95-2 dated 21.11.1995 and hence she is not entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds and accordingly the writ petition is sought to be dismissed. 4. From the above, the undisputed facts are that the deceased husband of the petitioner worked as Instrument Mechanic I Grade and he died while in service and now the dispute is with regard to payment of family pension. The case of the petitioner is that no such alternative pension scheme has been implemented, whereas the case of the respondent – company by referring to the proceedings dated 21.11.1995, is that the petitioner has been provided with alternative pension scheme. This being a disputed question of fact cannot be resolved in the writ petition and the same has been considered based on the records available with the respondent – company. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents, to consider the case of the petitioner for providing appointment on compassionate grounds in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. AVS ---------------------------- 09—07—2008