IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21960 of 2004 Between: Smt. P. Kamalamma, W/o. Late Sri P. Gopal Rao, Govardhanagiri, Karimnagar District. .... PETITIONER AND The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., (Region) Nizamabad, Nizamabad District ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner and appoint her son in any suitable post under the bread winner scheme forthwith and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.GOVINDA RAJULU Counsel for the Respondent: SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY The Court at the admission stage made the following : ORDER: - The husband of the petitioner was employed as Conductor in the A.P.S.R.T.C. He is said to have died on 07.06.1998. The petitioner was extended the service benefits of her deceased husband. Thereafter, she made a representation, dated 20.10.1999, for providing employment under “Bread Winner” scheme. She complains that no action has been taken on her application so far. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 3. The respondent had introduced the scheme of ‘Bread Winner’ to provide suitable employment in the categories of Driver, Conductor and Shramik, to the dependents of the employees, who died in harness. The details of the scheme are not placed before this Court. The question as to whether the petitioner fulfills the conditions to be extended the benefit of the scheme, has to be examined by the respondent. An application filed by a dependent of the deceased employee cannot be kept pending indefinitely. 4. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the application, dated 20.10.1999, filed by the petitioner, within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. To avoid further complications, it is directed that the petitioner shall submit a copy of the said representation along with a copy of the order passed in the writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Dated: 01st December, 2004 RAR To 1) The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., (Region) Nizamabad, Nizamabad District 2) 2 CD copies