IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11643 OF 1999 Between: K.Ramadevi ..... PETITIONER AND Vice Chairman & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and others .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11643 OF 1999 O R D E R : The petitioner’s husband by name Pullaiah, who was working as a Driver in Chirala Depot of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation died on 04.01.1992, while in service. The petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment was rejected by proceedings dated 21.08.1992 and the petitioner was advised to take the monetary benefits in lieu of the employment. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.20922 of 1997. The said writ petition was disposed of and pursuant thereto, the petitioner’s case was considered for appointment as Conductor. Though she was provisionally selected by the selection committee on 01.10.1997, in the medical examination she was declared unfit for the post of Conductor. In the circumstances, the Corporation by proceedings dated 27.11.1998, advised the petitioner to receive the additional monetary benefits in lieu of the employment. The said order dated 27.11.1998 is under challenge in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that since the petitioner was provisionally selected by the selection committee, though her candidature to the post of Conductor was rejected on the ground that she was found unfit on medical examination, the respondent Corporation ought to have considered her case for appointment in any other suitable post. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation, while relying upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad and others v. Valluru Venkata Narayana and another[1], vehemently contended that since the policy of compassionate appointment is not existing, the Corporation cannot be compelled to provide the alternative employment. The law is well settled that no direction can be issued to the employer to give compassionate appointment to the dependant of a deceased employee in violation of any policy with regard to the compassionate appointment. There can be no dispute about the said legal position. However, it is to be noticed that the policy with regard to giving compassionate appointment to one of the dependants of the deceased employee, who died in harness, was abolished with effect from 05.09.2001 in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.36. In the present case the petitioner’s husband died much prior to that and the petitioner’s claim was already considered by the Corporation in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20922 of 1997. Hence, the above Judgment of the Division Bench has no application. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner though she was selected by the selection committee, she could not be appointed as a Conductor since she was found medically unfit for the post of Conductor. In the circumstances, the respondents should have considered her candidature for appointment in any other suitable post, subject to her eligibility. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application seeking alternative suitable employment in the Corporation. If any such representation is made, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders be passed by the respondents in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. No costs. ​_____________ Date: 23.03.2010 G. ROHINI, J [1] 2008 (3) ALT 5 (D.B)