THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION NO.20601 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioners-Government filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking a Writ of Certiorari assailing the order dated 11.11.2009 passed in O.A.No.6135 of 2005 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad {“the Tribunal” for brevity}, whereby the Tribunal disposed of the O.A. directing the respondents therein-petitioners herein to consider the cases of the applicants in providing employment to them as was done in the case of Smt.V.Sudharani, whose lands, which are adjacent to the lands of the applicants, were acquired and she was offered appointment through proceedings of the Superintending Engineer, Gadwal, dated 23.10.2004, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents herein filed O.A.No.6135 of 2005 alleging that their lands were acquired by the Government for construction of Jurala Project and so, they are entitled to appointment as per their qualification under G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986. It is their contention that one Smt.V.Sudharani was offered appointment through proceedings dated 23.10.2004 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, whose lands are adjacent to the lands of the respondents herein and acquired for the same purpose. The first respondent herein submitted representation to the District Collector, Mahabubnagar, on 24.01.2005 seeking employment but no employment is provided and hence, the respondents filed the said O.A. The petitioners herein filed counter in the O.A. stating that the applicants’ lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of camp buildings and not for the purpose of Project and as per G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986, the displaced persons seeking employment must belong to project affected families due to submergence area of the concerned projects but not from the families affected or displaced due to other connected or related works of the projects or under the canals of the projects. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that it is nowhere mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.98 that only persons whose lands were acquired for construction of the project or whose lands are submerged alone are entitled for employment under G.O.Ms.No.98 and not persons whose lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of the buildings in connection with the dam. Para-3 of G.O.Ms.No.98 reads that the Government have carefully examined the proposal in consultation with APPSC to provide jobs to the displaced persons of the project or their dependants on a regular basis and to keep such appointments outside the purview of APPSC and to reserve certain percentage of posts in the projects for the displaced persons to ensure their appointment. Para-4 (iii) of G.O.Ms.No.98 reads that preference shall be given with reference to the date of displacement and to those applicants whose houses and lands are acquired against those whose land or house only is acquired. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, G.O.Ms.No.98 does not restrict the compassionate appointment only to the persons whose lands were acquired for the purpose of project only for submergence. Moreover, similarly situated persons were considered by the petitioners and employment was provided. The lands of one Smt.V.Sudharani, which are adjacent to the lands of the respondents, were acquired and she was offered appointment through proceedings of the Superintending Engineer, Gadwal, dated 23.10.2004, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order dated 11.11.2009 passed in O.A.No.6135 of 2005 by the Tribunal and hence, the Writ Petition fails. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED, J) _______________ (K.G.SHANKAR, J) 21st July 2011 RRB