IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18754 of 2004 Between: G.Pawan S/o.Late G.Prabhakar Rao, R/o. Flat No.8-20/5 Norisnests, Red Cross Road Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman and Managing Director (Personnel Department), Human Resource Development Division, Syndicate Bank, Head Office at Manipal. 2 The Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank (Personnel Department), Human Resource Development Division, Syndicate Bank, Manipal – 576 119. .....RESPONDENTS 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, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned orders dated 17-7-2002 passed by the 2nd respondent is illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioners case for compassionate appointment to the post of Clerk or any other suitable post. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SHIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.KRISHNA RAO The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims that he is the son of an employee of the respondent-Bank. His father died on 30-08-2001 while in service. Therefore, he made an application on 14-03-2002 requesting the second respondent for giving compassionate appointment to him. The second respondent passed an order on 17-07-2002 rejecting the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, on the ground that his family is getting Rs.4,088/- under pension including interest on the pension. The petitioner contends that against the order of the rejection, he made a representation to the first respondent on 15-09-2002. The first respondent so far did not pass any order. Therefore, he approached this Court through this Writ Petition seeking to declare the order of the second respondent dated 17-07-2002 as illegal and arbitrary. Since the representation said to be made by the petitioner is pending with the first respondent, it would be appropriate to direct the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the said representation. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 15-09-2002 according to the existing rules, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If no representation is traceable, it may be informed to the petitioner about the said fact. ____________________ Dr. G. Yethirajulu, J. Dt:13th October, 2004. Rns. To 1 The Chairman and Managing Director (Personnel Department) Human Resource Development Division, Syndicate Bank, Head Office at Manipal. 2 The Chief Manager Syndicate Bank (Personnel Department), Human Resource Development Division, Syndicate Bank, Manipal – 576 119. 3. Two CD copies.