IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24934 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt. M.C. Parvathi W/o. Late M.C. Munu Swamy R/o. H.No. 10-178, Marati veedhi, Adoni, Kurnool District. 2 Smt. Meenakshi D/o. Late M.C. Munu Swamy R/o. H.No. 10-178, Marati veedhi, Adoni, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Registrar (Management) High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. 2 The Principal District Judge Kurnool Kurnool Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to Official Memorandum in ROC. No.1562/2007-C-6 dated 23-08-2007 of the 1st respondent and the order in Dis.No.5728/Estt./2008 dated 29-07-2008 of the 2nd respondent and declare same as illegally, arbitrary, unjust, in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of the notification issued on 09-11-2005 framing Rules Under Section 28 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and quash the same. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.V.PADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.M.BHASKARA LAKSHMI (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24934 of 2008 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) The husband of the 1st petitioner by name late M.C.Muniswamy died on 25-09-2005 while he was working as an Attender in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Adoni, Kurnool District, leaving behind him his wife, the 1st petitioner-M.C.Parvathi, his three daughters namely 2nd petitioner-Smt.Meenakshi, Smt.Vishalakshi and Smt.Jaya Lakshmi, who are aged 41 years, 26 years, 20 years and 18 years respectively as per the Family Members Certificate dated 24.12.2005 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Adoni. All the three daughters are married. The 1st petitioner is residing with the 2nd petitioner’s family. The 1st petitioner and her other two daughters have expressed their no-objection to provide compassionate appointment to the 2nd petitioner and accordingly, an application was made to the 2nd respondent for providing compassionate appointment. The 2nd respondent, after considering the Death Certificate, Family Members Certificate, no objection letters of the other two daughters and after conducting necessary enquiry, provisionally selected the 2nd petitioner for the post of Attender on compassionate grounds under the A.P.Last Grade Service in the unit of the District Judge, Kurnool, and accordingly intimated the same to the 2nd petitioner by notice in Dis.No.2316/ESTT/2006, dated 25- 03-2006 stating that she would be given posting orders subject to verification of her character and antecedents. It is stated that there is nothing adverse with regard to the character and antecedents of the 2nd petitioner and therefore, she is entitled for posting orders. But, however, the appointment order was not issued to the 2nd petitioner. Therefore, she made a representation to the 1st respondent. Pursuant to the said representation, the 1st respondent called for certain remarks from the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent appears to have sent letter dated 28-07-2007 to the 1st respondent stating that the 2nd petitioner is living with her husband and the 1st petitioner is having sufficient means and income to maintain herself. Taking note of the said letter, the 1st respondent issued Official Memorandum in ROC No.1562/2007-C-6, dated 23-08-2007, which reads as follows:- “Smt.M.C.Meenakshi, D/o.Late M.C.Muniswamy, formerly attender, Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Adoni, Kurnool District, is hereby informed that since the applicant is living with her husband and spouse of the deceased has sufficient means of livelihood, her application for appointment on compassionate grounds is liable to be rejected.” Basing on the aforesaid Memo, the 2nd respondent by his order dated 29-08-2007 rejected the request of the 2nd petitioner on the ground that she is living with her husband and the spouse of the deceased i.e., the 1st petitioner herein has sufficient means of livelihood. It is further stated that subsequently the 1st petitioner also made an application to the 2nd respondent to appoint her on compassionate grounds. However, the 2nd respondent by order dated 11-06-2008 rejected the application of the 1st petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as per the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.612, General Administration (Services.A) Department, dated 30-10-1991, in Clause 2 (iii), where the deceased employee does not have any male child, but leaves behind him a married daughter and an unmarried minor daughter, the choice of selecting one of them for appointment under the social security scheme shall be left to the mother. It is stated that the deceased employee left behind him the 1st petitioner and his three daughters. The 1st petitioner and other two daughters have given no objection for appointment of the 2nd petitioner on compassionate grounds. Though the 2nd petitioner is married and living with her husband in the 1st petitioner’s house, there is no prohibition for appointment of the 2nd petitioner on compassionate grounds. We have perused the records and heard the rival contentions. Merely because the spouse receives the death benefits of the deceased, it cannot be said that the spouse is having sufficient means of livelihood. If that reasoning is applied, no dependant of a deceased employee will ever get any compassionate appointment. In fact, the husband of the 2nd petitioner is stated to be working as a coolie on daily wages and has no fixed means of income. As per the aforesaid Government order, the 2nd petitioner is entitled for consideration for appointment to the post of attender on compassionate grounds as per the choice of the 1st petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioners have not been given any opportunity of hearing before the rejecting of their request for appointment of the 2nd petitioner on compassionate grounds. In fact, the 2nd respondent provisionally selected the 2nd petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds but no appointment order was given and therefore, the petitioners have been making representations to the respondents. On such representations, some enquiry seems to have been conducted and without issuing any notice to the petitioners, their request has been rejected that too on untenable grounds. We are of the opinion that the grounds on which the respondents rejected the request of the 2nd petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds are not tenable. Therefore, we set aside the rejection orders passed by the respondents and direct the 2nd respondent to consider the case of the petitioners afresh keeping in view the order of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.612, dated 30-10-2001, Clause 2 (iii), and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date : 30-04-2009 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KBJ}