IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 15793 of 2009 Between: Smt.Alapu Bala Dhana Vijaya Laxmi W/o.Late A. John R/o.Opp; Lorry Owners Union office Eleswaram, East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The APSRTC, rep.by its Managing Director Musheerabad,Hyderabad 2 The APSRTC, rep.by its Regional manager, East Godavari Region at Rajahmundry ...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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in spite of the vacancies available in pursuance of the Proc,.No.Lc/876(12)/00-RM-RJY Rajahmundry, dated 10.3.2004 and issuing Notification calling applications from the outsiders vide Notification in Proc.No.PD1/797(2)/09 dated 6.7.2009 is high handed and arbitrary, action violative of Article 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and as such the impugned notification is liable to be set aside in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner forthwith and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.15793 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in considering the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner states that in view of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.10106 of 2000 as well as the interim orders passed in W.P.No.23888 of 2003 and the consequential proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent dated 10.03.2004, the respondents ought to have appointed the petitioner in any of the vacancies notified in the notification dated 6.7.2009. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. At the outset, it is to be noted that the notification dated 6.7.2009 was issued inviting tenders for outsourcing of works to be carried out by stenographers/typists and attenders but not for recruitment against the sanctioned vacancies. No other material could be placed before this Court to show that any recruitments are proposed on regular basis against sanctioned vacancies. In the circumstances, the respondents cannot be held to have committed any error and no mandamus can be issued compelling the respondents to appoint the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:04.08.2009 mrb