IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24392 of 2004 Between: B. Surekha, W/o Late Sri B.J. B.Naidu, R/o Pulikallu Post, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.S.R.T.C, Rep. by Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Works Manager, APSRTC, Zonal Workshop, Padugupadu, Nellore, Nellore 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 will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or directions, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider the petitioners representation dated 7-3-2003 as per the Circular PD.No. 60/2003 dated 30-7-2003 or any suitable post under the bread winner scheme. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.GOVINDA RAJULU Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.MANMADHA REDDY The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a Mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 7.3.2003 as per the Circular P.D.No.60 of 2003, dated 30.7.2003 for any suitable post under the Bread Winner Scheme. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The husband of the petitioner died on 16.3.1997. The writ petitioner submitted an application on 9.1.1998 to provide a post of Attender under the Bread Winner Scheme. In view of her application, the 2nd respondent paid some of the death benefits of her husband to her. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued a notice, dated 17.4.2001 to the petitioner rejecting her claim for the post of Attender, instead, the 2nd respondent advised her to take additional monitory benefits in lieu of employment. As the petitioner did not claim any additional monitory benefits, she submitted a representation, dated 7.3.2003 to the 2nd respondent with a request to consider her case under the Bread Winner Scheme. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 7.3.2003 and take appropriate decision for providing employment to the petitioner under the Bread Winner Scheme and pass necessary orders in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Corporation including the order and scheme if any available with the Corporation, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J.) 28th December, 2004. bcj To 1 The Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Works Manager, APSRTC, Zonal Workshop, Padugupadu, Nellore, Nellore District. 3. Two C.D. copies