IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1617 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 14/07/2008 in WP NO : 13798 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Nizampuram Ravinder S/o. Rajeshwar R/o. Chelpur Village, Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Singareni Bhavan, Laki-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 2 Director (PA&W), Singareni Colliries Co. Ltd., Kothagudem, Khammam District. 3 The Chief General Manager, Ramagundam-I, Karimnagar District. 4 The Colliery Manager, Singareni Collieries Co.Ltd., Kothagudem, Khammam Distirct. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.P.PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.KRISHNA RAO The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by an order dated 14-7-2008 passed in W.P.No. 13798 of 2008, this appeal has been filed by the original petitioner. The case of the petitioner in the petition was that his brother expired when he was in service and, therefore, he had made an application for appointment to any post on compassionate ground and as the said application had been rejected, the aforestated petition was filed. The petition has been rejected. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection, this appeal has been filed. After hearing the learned Advocates and upon perusal of the impugned order, we find that the appellant-petitioner had submitted his application after four years of his brother’s death and it was the case of the respondent-employer that the appellant was in fact not the brother of the deceased. In the circumstances, the application given for appointment on compassionate ground had been turned down. In our opinion, the learned single Judge has rightly rejected the petition mainly on the ground that the application for appointment was made after four years. Moreover, disputed questions of fact were also involved in the petition and, therefore, in our opinion, the petition has been rightly rejected. It is in fact doubtful whether the appellant petitioner was the brother of the deceased employee. For the aforestated reasons, the appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. ______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ___________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th December, 2008. GRR