HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION NO.7848 of 2010 Between: 1. M.Bharathamma and another …PETITIONER(S) a n d 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor and others …RESPONDENT(S) HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION NO.7848 of 2010 ORDER: (per HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH) This Writ Petition is filed seeking to direct the respondents to implement the Award dated 19.09.1998 passed by the Lok Adalath, Madanapalle. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the father of the 1st petitioner and husband of the 2nd petitioner while working as Attender in Revenue Department in Chittoor District died in harness on 27.01.1986; that the 1st petitioner made an application dated 27.01.1986 requesting the revenue authorities to provide her a job on compassionate grounds as per G.O.Ms.No.1005 Employment and Social Welfare (G) Department dated 27.12.1974 read with G.O.Ms.No.687 GAD Services (A) dated 03.10.1977; that the said application was received by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramasamudram, on 28.01.1986; and that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramasamudram, directed the petitioners to produce Succession Certificate for disbursement of death benefits of the deceased. While matters stood thus, disputes arose between 2nd petitioner and Smt Maddili Nagamma and O.P.Nos.10/86 and 9/87 were filed before the Principal District Munsif Court, Punganur, claiming death benefits of the deceased and against the orders passed in those O.Ps., A.S.Nos.17/92 and 19/92 were preferred before the Additional District Judge, Madanapalle. Both the appeals ended in compromise before the Lok Adalath, Madanapalle, vide Award dated 19.01.1998, with the following terms and conditions. “1. The appellants are entitled for all the pension benefits, gratuity etc., and other monitory benefits excepting a sum of Rs.22,500/- permanently and the respondents have no claim for those benefits. 2. The respondents are entitled to receive Rs.22,500/- as stated in clause No.1 from the Government out of the above benefits and the 2nd respondent is entitled for job which would be provided on compassionate grounds and this appellants cannot claim any job detrimental to the interest of the respondents. 3. Appellants and respondents will equally share the immovable properties left by late Venkatappa if any. 4. The appellants and respondents shall equally bear the necessary expenditure in obtaining the succession certificate such as deposit of N.J. stamps and other miscellaneous expenditure. 5. The respondents who are the petitioners in O.P.9/87 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Punganur will be entitled to withdraw this amount deposited by them if any towards the N.J. stamps, since succession certificate issued in O.P.10/86 in which the appellants are the petitioners. 6. In the light of above terms both appeals are settled.” The case of the 1st petitioner is that she approached the Legal Services Authority along with the Award of the Lok Adalath by way of a petition vide PLP No.58 of 2009 for not enforcing the Award and the said PLP was closed on 23.01.2010 directing her to approach the Court of law. Hence, this petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. 4. Admittedly, the said compromise was entered into between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents and the Government is not a party to the Award passed before the Lok Adalath. According to the said Award, the third respondent and others are entitled to receive all monetory benefits excepting a sum of Rs.22,500/-; the petitioners are entitled to receive Rs.22,500/- from out of the monetory benefits; and the 1st petitioner is entitled to the job that may be provided on compassionate grounds. Admittedly, the 1st petitioner is said to have made an application on 27.01.1986 seeking to provide a job on compassionate grounds. If the said application is not considered and disposed of, it is for her to pursue the remedies available to her. It is stated that the appellants in appeals have received the death benefits but the petitioners were not paid the monetory benefits of Rs.22,500/- so also the 1st petitioner was denied of the job on compassionate grounds. 5. The petitioners, in effect, seek enforcement of the conditions of the Award passed by the Lok Adalath by directing the official respondents to provide the 1st petitioner a job on compassionate grounds and to direct the respondents to pay Rs.22,500/- to them. We are of the opinion that since the Government is not a party to the Award and since this Court is not an executing Court, the petitioners cannot seek a direction either to the official respondents to provide the 1st petitioner a job on compassionate grounds, or to the respondents to pay Rs.22,500/- to the petitioners, in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and since the remedy of the petitioners is elsewhere, we see no reason to exercise discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to entertain the Writ Petition. 6. Leaving it open to the petitioners, if they so choose, to avail the remedies that are available to them, the writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. __________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J __________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J 16th June, 2010 CVRK