THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY Writ Petition No.18615 of 2005 23-08-2005 Between: M.D.Razia Begum ... PETITONER AND 1. The Managing Director, APSRTC, RTC X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY Writ Petition No.18615 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not considering the application of the petitioner for providing employment to petitioner’s son on compassionate grounds under Bread-Winners Scheme. It is stated that the petitioner’s husband while working in the respondent-Corporation died due to cardiac attack on 11.10.2000. As the petitioner does not have any other earning member in her family, she made an application seeking appointment to her daughter on compassionate grounds under Bread-Winners Scheme. Though the application was made as early as in the year 2000, the respondent- Corporation sent a call letter for consideration of the claim of the petitioner for providing employment to her daughter only on 14.02.2005. As by that date, the marriage of the petitioner’s daughter was fixed, the petitioner made another representation seeking employment to her son instead of her daughter. However, the said representation was not considered by the respondents. Therefore, the present writ petition. At the time of hearing, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the averments made in the affidavit that the petitioner’s son is possessing all the requisite qualifications and therefore it is appropriate to consider the claim of the petitioner to provide employment to her son in the place of her daughter as was originally claimed. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent- Corporation, however, contended that the application has to be made within the stipulated time of three years from the date of expiry. Therefore, the petitioner may not be entitled to seek employment to her son. Heard both sides and considered the material on record. Admittedly, the petitioner made her application seeking employment to her daughter on compassionate grounds in the year 2000 itself. Therefore, there are no laches on her part or delay in making the application. However, the respondent-Corporation issued call letter to the petitioner’s daughter only on 14.02.2005 by which time, the petitioner’s daughter marriage was fixed. Therefore, the petitioner made another representation to consider the claim of the petitioner’s son in the place of her daughter which was not considered and disposed of. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-Corporation to consider the representation of the petitioner to provide employment to her son in the place of her daughter and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _______________ 23.08.2005 VGB