THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU Writ Petition No.19974 OF 2011 ORDER: 1 Assailing the action of the respondents in not providing compassionate appointment to him as per the existing rules and schemes of deceased employees of the respondent Port Trust, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. 2 Brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the Writ Petition are that the petitioner possesses Diploma in Civil Engineering and that his father who worked as Assistant Foreman in OHC, TXR of CME department of the respondent Port Trust died while he was in service on 01.07.2008. Subsequently the petitioner made an application dated 30.07.2008 to the respondents for appointment on compassionate grounds whereupon the 2nd respondent asked him to furnish Non-employment certificate and the documents of testimonials in respect of his technical qualifications within the prescribed format and the petitioner had also complied with. The petitioner had also given reminder to the respondents through his application dated 07.01.2009. Thereafter the 2nd respondent issued a letter dated 15.05.2009 asking the petitioner to correct the name of his father described in the testimonials, which also was complied with by the petitioner. Again through letter dated 08.06.2009 the 2nd respondent asked the petitioner to correct certain other certificates also, which was also complied with by the petitioner. But there was no response from the side of the respondents. So, the action of the respondents is illegal inasmuch as the policy guidelines issued by the Union of India, Ministry of Shipping (Ports Wing) provide employment to the children of deceased / medically invalidated workers/ employees in Class-III /IV posts in Visakhapatnam Port Trust. The petitioner had acquired all the requisite qualifications for being appointed in the post of Class-III. In spite of possessing the requisite qualification and more particularly, the petitioner is entitled for being appointed on compassionate grounds, the respondents are not considering his case. Hence the present Writ Petition. 3 The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that father of the petitioner died in harness and immediately thereafter he made an application to the respondents to consider his case on compassionate grounds, but his case has not been considered. 4 On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for the respondents contended that the compassionate appointments have to be considered in accordance with the rules and regulations framed from time to time. 5 The factual matrix is not in dispute. Father of the petitioner died on 01.07.2008 due to severe illness while working as Assistant Foreman in OHC, TXR of CME department of the respondents. For that purpose, the petitioner made an application to the respondents. But, so far, his application has not been considered. As per the guidelines issued by the Government of India, Department of Per. & Trg. O.M.No.14014/19/2002-Estt.(D) dated 5.5.2003 the maximum time for a person’s name to be kept under consideration for offering compassionate appointment will be three years subject to the condition that the prescribed Committee has reviewed and certified the penurious condition of the applicant at the end of the first and second year. After three years, if compassionate appointment is not possible to be afforded to the applicant, his case will be finally closed, and will not be considered again. 6 The application made by the petitioner is pending with the respondents for the last three years and no action has been taken so far. The prescribed period is going to be expired by the end of this month. 7 In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the norms and conditions for appointment on compassionate grounds before 31.7.2011. No order as to costs. _____________ K.C. BHANU, J 15.07.2011 Kvsn Dispatch immediately. BO KVSN/DRK