IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.28997 of 2009 Between: The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, General Admn.(Ser.G) Depart., Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others ..... PETITIONERS AND K.Ravishankar .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.28997 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) This writ petition is filed by the State questioning the order of the A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in O.A.1126/2005, dated 01.05.2009. The respondent herein had approached the Tribunal questioning the impugned order of the District Collector, Khammam whereby his request for medical invalidation was rejected. The Tribunal found that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in V.Siva Murthy vs. State of A.P[1] the Government itself had revived the scheme of compassionate appointment by issuing G.O.Ms.No.661, dated 23.10.2008, and in that view of the matter, the rejection of the representation of the respondent by the District Collector, Khammam was found not justified. The Tribunal, therefore, disposed of the O.A., directing the petitioners herein to consider the case of the respondent, in accordance with the said scheme, as revived under G.O.Ms.No.661, dated 23.10.2008. Questioning the said order, the present writ petition is filed. We have heard the learned Government Pleader, who has strenuously contended that the respondent is not entitled to the benefits of the said scheme. It is, however, not necessary to go into the legality or otherwise of the claim of the respondent for seeking medical invalidation, either in terms of the revived G.O.Ms.No.661, referred to above, or the earlier schemes which were in force. The Tribunal has merely directed the petitioners herein to consider the representation of the respondent herein afresh and pass appropriate orders, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. We would not like to interfere with the order impugned, except to the extent of extending time by four more weeks from today for considering the representation of the respondent herein. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dated: 18.01.2010 Dsr [1] Civil Appeal No.4210/2003