IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15808 of 2003 Between: 1 Smt. Asha Begum, W/o. late Basheer Ahmed, Sirpur (Post and Village), Hatnoora Mandal, Medak District. 2 Gulam Hussain, S/o. late Basheer Ahmed, Sirpur (Post and Village), Hatnoora Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Mushirabad, Hyderabad 2 The Regional Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Medak Region, Medak. 3 The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Sangareddy Depot, Medak 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 an order, direction or writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the proceedings dated 21.2.2000 in rejecting the claim of the petitioners for the post of Conductor, Shramik or any other suitable post on Compassionate grounds is illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners' son for the post of Conductor, Shramik or any other suitable post on Compassionate grounds in pursuance of her application dated 11.3.1991. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents : The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15808 of 2003 ORAL ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the Proceedings dated 21-2-2000 issued by the 3rd respondent as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner’s son in the post of Conductor, Shramik or any other suitable post on compassionate grounds in pursuance of the application of the petitioner dated 11-3-1991. Under the impugned Proceedings, the case of the petitioner was rejected for appointment under bread winner scheme in view of the death in harness of the husband of the petitioner, on the ground that she has not applied for employment within 3 years from the date of death of the employee. However, the petitioner was directed to file an application for monetary benefit in lieu of employment. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the respondents have not committed any error calling for interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, this will not preclude the petitioner from filing an application seeking monetary benefits in lieu of employment and on filing such an application, the respondents shall consider and pass appropriate orders within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the application. No order as to costs. 03-3-2008 prk