HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No : 8759 of 2008 O R D E R: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner under breadwinner scheme as arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent to appoint the petitioner in any suitable post in the respondent institution. The brief facts, which led to filing of this Writ Petition, are as under: One Mr. Mohd. Ghouse died on 24th June 2000 while serving as a driver in the respondent institution, due to cardiac arrest. The petitioner herein is the 3rd son of the deceased through his 1st wife, Smt. Guljar Begum, who deserted the deceased employee and her children due to a mental disorder. Later, the deceased married Smt. Rasheeda Begum and also Smt. Ghousia Begum and was blessed with two daughters and a son through them respectively. The petitioner claims that after the death of his father, being his legal heir, he is entitled to be considered for appointment in the office of the respondent on compassionate grounds and accordingly, he had applied to the respondent, by producing all relevant certificates. While so, Smt. Rasheeda Begum, the 2nd wife of his deceased father, filed a civil suit - O.S. No. 284 of 2001 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada against the petitioner and his brothers and the 3rd wife of the deceased, seeking declaration that she is entitled for retiral benefits including appointment to any suitable post. After some period, Smt. Ghousia Begum, the 3rd wife of the deceased, filed Writ Petition No. 10285 of 2002 before this Court seeking consideration of her case for appointment in any suitable post. By an order dated 7th August 2002, this Court dismissed the Writ Petition, holding that the parties may proceed further, depending upon the outcome of O.S. No. 284 of 2001. While the matter stood thus, O.S. No. 284 of 2001 was referred to Lok Adalat, where an Award, dated 24th April 2004, under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, was passed to the following effect: “1. The job is to be given to the defendant, 2. The Pension may be drawn by the plaintiff, 3. The death benefits are to be divided into three shares, two shares to plaintiff's daughters, one to defendant's son.” Subsequently, as per the directions issued by the respondent, the learned III Additional District Judge, Kakinada issued notice to all the legal heirs of the deceased employee. In pursuance thereof, all the parties have appeared and expressed their willingness to settle the matter amongst themselves amicably. Accordingly, they executed a Khararnama, dated 18th February 2006 and requested the learned Judge to pass orders in terms thereof. In view of the said compromise, the learned III Additional District Judge passed orders on 18th February 2006 to the following effect: 1. that the 3rd son of the deceased late Md. Ghouse through his 1st wife, Md. Shafiulla is entitled to the post on compassionate grounds; within six months of such appointment, he has to pay Rs.50,000/- to each of his two brothers, born to the 1st wife of the deceased employee. 2. that Smt. Rasheeda Begum is entitled to receive family pension from the date of death of late Md. Ghouse including arrears of pension, till her death or marriage and thereafter to minor daughters till their marriage. 3. That Smt. Ghousia Begum is entitled to other benefits viz. Gratuity, Chief Justice Relief Fund, General Provident Fund amount due under A.P.G.L.I. and General Insurance Scheme amount due. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that though the learned III Additional District Judge passed orders, wherein it has specifically been observed that the petitioner be given appointment, the respondent, so far, has not issued any appointment to him. Hence, he filed the present Writ Petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to proceedings, dated 18th February 2006, issued by the III Additional District Judge, as extracted supra, and contended that when once all the parties have entered into a compromise and executed a Khararnama, there is no justification for the respondent in not providing any employment to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the terms of Khararnama are contrary to the terms of the Award passed by the Lok Adalat in O.S. No. 284 of 2001 and therefore, it cannot be taken into account. As could be seen from the material available on record, all the legal heirs of the deceased employee have entered into a compromise and executed a Khararnama to that effect, pursuant to which, the learned III Additional District Judge, Kakinada has passed orders recording the terms and conditions settled between the parties. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondent to take appropriate steps in terms of the order, dated 18th February 2006 passed by the learned III Additional District Judge and accordingly, consider appointing the petitioner herein on compassionate grounds. On getting such appointment, the petitioner, within six months, has to pay Rs.50,000/- each to the two sons of the deceased employee through his 1st wife and obtain a receipt in acknowledgment thereof. In default, the respondent authorities shall take appropriate action against the petitioner. With this, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. ---------------------------------- (GHULAM MOHAMMED,J) ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 6th August 2009 Note: Issue CC in three days. ksld ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} 3rd August 2009 ksld