*THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY + Writ Petition No.3333 of 2006 % Dated 23.07.2008 K. Prasanna Kumar, S/o. Madaiah, Kocheruvu Village and Post, Dhone Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER 1 The Superintending Engineer ( Operation), APCPDCL, Kurnool. 2 The Chief General Manager, APCPDCL, Kurnool. ….Respondents ! Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K.Srinivas Reddy ^ Counsel for respondents : Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy < GIST: > HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3333 of 2006 Between: K. Prasanna Kumar, S/o. Madaiah, Kocheruvu Village and Post, Dhone Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer ( Operation), APCPDCL, Kurnool. 2 The Chief General Manager, APCPDCL, Kurnool. .....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 issue any appropirate writ, order or order or direction more particularly one in the natureof writ of Mandamus; i) to declare the action of the respondents as illegal, arbitrary and arbitrary ande unconstitutional in not considering the petitioners case for compassionate appointment. ii) to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners case for compassionate appointment to any suitable post. iii) to call for records, Iv) and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 3333 OF 2006 ORDER: The father of the petitioner, by name Madaiah, was initially engaged as a Contract Labour for the works undertaken by the then A.P. State Electricity Board. His case was not considered in terms of B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.05.1997, against 50% vacancies, on the ground that he was over-aged. However, he was appointed as Village Electricity Worker and thereafter, as Contract Junior Lineman on 05.08.2002. The contract was extended from time to time. When he was undertaking the repair of a transformer on 12.12.2004, he was electrocuted and died. The petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents with a request to provide him employment on compassionate grounds. His grievance is that the respondents are not considering his case and no action has been taken on the representation filed by him. The 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit. The fact that Madaiah was appointed as Village Electricity Worker and thereafter, as Contract Junior Lineman, is admitted. It is also stated that various other contract Junior Linemen engaged along with Madaiah were regularized in January 2005. The 1st respondent took the plea that the benefit of compassionate employment cannot be extended to the petitioner, since his father was neither a regular employee nor a trainee employee. Sri K. Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after prolonged correspondence and legal proceedings, Madaiah was appointed as Village Electricity Worker and thereafter, as Contract Junior Lineman, and at a time, when his services were about to be regularized, he died, while discharging the official duties. He contends that the Electricity Board itself issued a memo, dated 15.03.1996 extending the benefit of compassionate employment to the dependents of the deceased trainee employees also and that the status of the father of the petitioner was more than that of a trainee. Sri P.R. Balaram Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, submits that the father of the petitioner was only a Contract Junior Lineman, by the time he died, and that he cannot be treated as a Trainee also. He further submits that though the other Contract Junior Linemen engaged along with the father of the petitioner were regularized, the petitioner cannot be extended the benefit. It is a matter of record that Madaiah ultimately came to be appointed as a Junior Lineman on 05.08.2002 and that the various persons engaged along with him were absorbed on regular basis on 12.01.2005. One month before the date of such regularization of other employees, Madaiah died, while repairing a transformer of the respondents-company. The employment on compassionate grounds is a scheme evolved to ensure that the dependants of an employee do not face penury, on account of his untimely death. Over the years, several instances of abuse and mis-application of the scheme have been noticed. If the scheme is to serve its above mentioned purpose, the present case provides an ideal instance. In all other cases, the benefit is extended, irrespective of the fact whether the employee died, during the course of discharging the duties or not. Here is a case, where the employee died, while discharging his duties. A Contract Junior Lineman acquires the status of a Trainee, if not a superior one. The reason is that a Trainee or Contract Junior Lineman is absorbed into service on verification of certain facts. In the counter affidavit, it is categorically stated that had Madaiah been alive, he would have been regularized along with others. The regularization of the co-employees of Madaiah took place one month after his death. This Court is of the view that this is a genuine instance, where the benefit of compassionate employment, deserves to be extended. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner for employment on compassionate grounds and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 23.07.2008 Note: L.R.Copy to be marked. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JGK} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 3333 OF 2006 Date: 23.07.2008 JSU