IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 22022 of 2004 Between: Balla Vijaya Lakshmi W/o Late Krishna Rao 49-35-21/1, Abidnagar, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Andhra Bank Personnel Department, Head Office, rep by Chief Officer (IR), Hyderabad 2. Andhra Bank, Personnel Department, Head Office, rep by Assistant General Manager (Per) Hyderabad 3. Andhra Bank, Personnel Department, Zonal Office, rep by Deputy General Manager, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam 4. Andhra Bank, Gavarapalem Branch rep by Branch Manager, Gavarapalem, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or a writ one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not providing appointment to the son of the petitioner under deceased quota on compassionate grounds in spite of recommendations dt 25-5-2004 of the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to provide employment to Mr.B. Deepak Kumar, the son of the petitioner in any suitable post, on compassionate grounds forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.SRINIVASA SARMA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: MR.N.RAMAMOHANA RAO The Court at the admission stage made the following Order: ORDER: This writ petition is filed to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 and 2 in not providing employment to the son of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary and to consequently direct the respondents to provide employment to him in any suitable post under compassionate grounds. The grievance of the petitioner is that her husband died on 20.12.2003 while he was working in the 4th respondent-Bank. Therefore, she made an application to the respondents to give a suitable appointment to her son on compassionate grounds. However, the same is not considered and no appointment was given to him. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the application of the petitioner contained all the details, the same has not been considered, in accordance with the scheme, by the respondent-Bank. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-Bank contended that for giving appointment on compassionate grounds, a scheme has been framed by the respondent-Bank. Therefore, the application of the petitioner will have to be considered as per the scheme, made by the competent authority. Having regard to the grievance of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Bank to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the scheme framed by them. For any reason the application of the petitioner does not fall into the guidelines, the same shall have to be communicated with reasons. No order as to costs. ___________ 15.12.2004 NOTE: Office to furnish C.C by one week (B.O) bsv To 1. The Chief Officer, Andhra Bank Personnel Department, Head Office, Hyderabad 2. The Assistant General Manager (Per), Andhra Bank Personnel Department, Head Office, Hyderabad 3. The Deputy General Manager, Andhra Bank, Personnel Department, Zonal Office, , Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam 4. The Branch Manager Andhra Bank, Gavarapalem Branch, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam District 5. Two CD copies.