THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13029 OF 2009 DATED: 30.10.2009 Between : G. Swarna Latha … Petitioner And 1. The APSRTC, rep. By its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad., and 2 others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13029 OF 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents – A.P. State Road Transport Corporation – in not considering the petitioner’s representation dated 6.6.2009 for appointment on compassionate grounds to the post of Attender or any suitable post as arbitrary and illegal. It is not in dispute that the petitioner’s husband by name Gaddam Yadagiri, who was working as Senior Assistant with the Corporation, had expired on 1.11.2008 while in service. The petitioner states that immediately thereafter she made a representation on 6.6.2009 to provide compassionate appointment to her in any suitable post. Alleging that the respondents failed to consider her request, the present writ petition is filed. On behalf of the Corporation, a counter-affidavit has been filed stating that since the State Government had dispensed with the compassionate appointment scheme, it is not possible to provide the appointment as sought by the petitioner. It is pleaded that the petitioner was also apprised of the said fact and the Personal Officer of the Corporation had also informed her that in lieu of compassionate appointment she would be paid additional monetary benefits. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. It is to be noticed that though initially a Scheme known as Bread Winner Scheme was in force in the Corporation thereby providing compassionate appointments to the kith and kin of the deceased employees, by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.36, dated 5.9.2001 the said scheme has been dispensed with deciding to make some exgratia payment to the dependents of the deceased in lieu of giving compassionate appointment. The above said fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance upon a subsequent Government Order issued vide G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 22.2.2008, contended that since the scheme of compassionate appointment has been restored, the Corporation is bound to provide suitable employment to the petitioner herein. On a careful reading of G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 22.2.2008, I do not find any substance in the petitioner’s contention. The relevant portion from the said G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 22.2.2008 may be extracted hereunder: “Government after careful examination of the matter, and keeping in view of the reforms and changed scenario, have decided to implement the Compassionate Appointment Scheme as per the consolidated existing instructions issued in the reference 7th read above, on par with State Government Employees, and accordingly, hereby order to restore the Compassionate Appointment Scheme to the employees dying in harness in State Level Public Enterprises and Co-operatives, with prospective effect from the date of issue of the orders in the matter and applicable only to such SLPEs and Co-operatives, having positive networth, which are financially sound, earning profits for the last five years and not dependent on Government for any kind of budgetary support whether in the form of Government grants or subsidy.” As could be seen, it has been decided by the Government to restore the Compassionate Appointment Scheme only in State Level Public Enterprises and Cooperatives having positive networth, which are financially sound, earning profits for the last five years and not dependent on Government for any kind of budgetary support whether in the form of Government grants or subsidy. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Corporation, it is categorically stated that the APSRTC does not satisfy any of the criteria mentioned in the above said G.O. and therefore G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 22.2.2008 restoring the Compassionate Appointment Scheme is not attracted. As expressed above, the decision of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 22.2.2008 has no general application to all the Public Sector Undertakings but only those Corporations and undertakings which come under the categories specified in para (5) of G.O. are bound to implement the Compassionate Appointment Scheme. In the circumstances, the action of the respondents in not providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Corporation to pay the additional monetary benefits to the petitioner in lieu of the compassionate employment as provided in G.O.Ms.No.36, dated 5.9.2001 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 30.10.2009 gbs