THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27090 of 2010 Dated:09.11.2010 Between: The Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Kurnool and another .. Petitioners And Smt. Jayamma and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27090 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition is filed assailing the legality and validity of the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the APAT’) in O.A.No.2446 of 2006, dated 19.10.2009. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the husband of the 1st respondent herein, late M. Abraham was appointed as Badili Worker (Public Health Worker) in the Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool District – petitioners herein, in the year 1987. While so, when his services were sought to be terminated, he filed I.D.No.124 of 1992 on the file of the Labour Court, Anantapur. Through the award dated 19.04.1994 the Labour Court ordered his reinstatement with continuity of service. Aggrieved of the same, the Corporation filed W.P. No.17401 of 1994 and the same was disposed of by this Court confirming the award passed by the Labour Court. In pursuance of the order in W.P. No.17401 of 1994, he was reinstated into service. Be that as it may, the husband of the 1st respondent died on 01.01.1998, while he was working as Badili Worker and as on that date, his services were not regularized under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh (Regularization of Appointments to Public Services and Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act, 1994 (Act 2 of 1994) (for short, the Act). While the matter stood thus, the 1st respondent filed O.A.No.10679 of 2002 before the APAT questioning the inaction of the Corporation in not providing employment to her under compassionate grounds. The APAT through its interim order dated 04.03.2003 directed the Corporation to consider the representation of the 1st respondent for appointment under compassionate grounds. But, the Corporation rejected the representation of the 1st respondent stating that the services of the husband of the 1st respondent were not regularized under the Act since he was not eligible for regularization under Section 7 of the Act. Challenging the same, the 1st respondent filed O.A.No.2446 of 2006 before the APAT questioning the action of the Corporation in rejecting her claim through endorsement dated 07.03.2006. After elaborate consideration of the material available on record, the APAT through its award dated 19.10.2009 allowed the said O.A. and directed the Corporation to appoint the 1st respondent on compassionate grounds in the suitable post. Aggrieved of the same, the Corporation filed the instant writ petition. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners - Corporation submits that the husband of the 1st respondent herein is not an N.M.R., but only a Badili Worker and she did not fulfill the conditions of G.O.Ms.Nos.212 and 112, dated 22.04.1994 and 23.07.1997, respectively, or G.O.Ms.118, dated 18.08.1999, which came into force after the death of her husband. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that her husband died while he was in service and she is eligible for compassionate appointment in view of the death of her husband. We have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The request of the 1st respondent herein is rejected by the Corporation, through an endorsement dated 07.03.2006, which reads as under: The Registrar, APAT, Hyderabad, Municipal Corporation, Roc.No.9025/02/F1 Kurnool, Dt.07.03.2006. ENDORSEMENT Sub:- ESTABLISHMENT – Public Health – Kurnool Municipal Corporation – Smt.M.Jajamma, W/o.Late M.Arbaham deceased Badili Worker – Expired on 01.01.1998 while in service as Badili Worker – Request for compassionate appointment – Rejected – Regarding. Ref:- 1. Application, dated 23.03.1998 of Smt.M.Jayamma, w/o.M.Abraham, Kurnool. 2. Section 7 of the A.P. Regulation of appointment to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff pattern and pay structure Act 1994. 3. G.O.Ms.No.212 Fin & Plg. Department, dt.22.04.1994. * * * The applicant Smt. M.Jayamma, W/o.late M.Abraham, deceased Badili worker of Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool is hereby informed that she is not eligible for compassionate appointment, as the services of her husband late M.Abraham, Badili worker were not regularized as on the date of his death. As he was temporary employee and he was not eligible, and not entitled for regularization as per Section 7 of the A.P. (Regularization of appointments to Public Services and Regularization of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act 1994 (Act 2/94) and as per G.O.Ms.No.212 F&P Department, dated 22.04.1994. Hence, her request for compassionate appointment is hereby rejected. Sd/- K.Venkateswarlu, Commissioner, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool. It appears that after the demise of the husband of the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent approached the petitioners - Corporation by filing an application within the time for compassionate appointment and when there was no response from the Corporation, she approached the APAT by filing O.A.No.10679 of 2002 questioning the inaction on the part of the Corporation in providing appointment under compassionate grounds. In the said O.A., interim orders were passed directing the Corporation to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the 1st respondent. Pursuant to the said order, the Corporation rejected the claim of the 1st respondent for compassionate appointment. Aggrieved of the same, the 1st respondent filed another O.A.No.2446 of 2006 which was allowed on 19.10.2009 holding that the endorsement made by the Corporation dated 07.03.2006 as illegal and directed the respondents therein to send the proposals and issue necessary orders for compassionate appointment within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Aggrieved of the said orders in the O.A., the Corporation filed the present writ petition. A perusal of the G.O.Ms.No.118, dated 18.08.1999 of the Finance and Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, it is clear that if the deceased Daily Wage or N.M.R. or Consolidated Pay Person or Contingent Worker on full time basis/part-time basis was fully eligible for regularization under Section 7 of the Act and also G.O.(P) No.112, dated 22.04.1994, who could not be regularized due to administrative reasons, the case of dependents of only such deceased Daily Wage or N.M.R., or Consolidated Pay Person or Contingent Worker can be considered for compassionate appointment from the date the issuance of orders. As rightly held by the APAT, the Labour Court and also by this Court in W.P.No.17401 of 1994, the husband of the 1st respondent cannot be treated as Badili worker, having been appointed in regular vacancies in the time scale of pay. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the APAT does not suffer from any infirmity, warranting interference by this Court. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _________________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J 09.11.2010 KH