IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 24227 of 1999 Between: Ch.Ramulu, S/o late Issaq, R/o 2-1-74, Madhuranagar, Nalgonda Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Nalgonda. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Nalgonda. 3 Personnel Officer, APSRTC, Nalgonda. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue an appropriate writ, one more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to produce the records and consequently to appoint me as a conductor/cleaner in the corporation under the bread winner scheme and pass such other order or orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstance of the case and in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SHIV KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks, by way of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to appoint him as a Conductor/Cleaner in the respondent-Corporation under the breadwinner scheme. It is the case of the petitioner that his father Sri Ch.Issac worked as Cleaner in the respondent-Corporation and while in service died on 03-06-1994 leaving behind him and his two sisters. It is his case that as per the breadwinner scheme available then, the Corporation was extending the beneﬁt of compassionate appointment to the children of the deceased employees who died in harness while in service. Though call letters were issued to him number of times, he was deprived of the beneﬁt of employment without any valid reason. In the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the respondents it is stated that though the petitioner was interviewed by the duly constituted Departmental Selection Committee, in view of the alteration found in the Declaration Form submitted by the deceased employee and inasmuch as the petitioner failed to establish his identity as a son of the deceased employee, he could not be given appointment in the Corporation. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that in view of the weak ﬁnancial condition of the Corporation the very practice of giving beneﬁt of appointment under the breadwinner scheme is dispensed with pursuant to the instructions issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under G.O.Ms.No.36 dated 05- 09-2001. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Corporation also relied upon a judgment of this Court in W.A.No.110 of 2008 dated 14-03-2008 wherein a similar claim was considered. While considering such similar claim, a Division Bench of this Court held that since the policy of giving appointment on compassionate ground is dispensed with and since there exists no policy with regard to giving appointment on compassionate ground, the Court cannot constrain the employer to give appointment on compassionate ground. In view of the judgment referred above, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought. The writ petition is thus devoid of merits. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner or his mother is entitled for any additional monetary beneﬁt as per the breadwinner scheme, this order will not preclude them to make such claim. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 04th November 2008 CVRK