The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C. RAMESH SAGAR Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI RAVINDRA BHARATI The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JU STICE NAMAVARAPU RA] I SHWAR RAO WRIT PETIT ION No.L9529 OF 2O0 t ORDER This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following r:lief : "...to issue an order, direction or writ more nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the z the 2"d respondent in not considering pet application for compassionate appointment , illegal, arbitrary apart from the same being violation of Art. 14, 16, 21 of Constitution t and to set aside the same consequently direci respondent 1 tc 3 to consider petitioner's apr for appointment in the post which she is eligi be pleased to pass such other order ot as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and propei circumstances of the case. " in the :tion of lioner's 's bad, n clear f India ing the tication tle and orders in the

2. Heard Sri C. Ramesh Sagar, learned cct nsel for the petitioner. Perused the material on record

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitic,r er belongs to the Scheduled Caste community and is the legally ,t:dded wife of late T. Narsing Das, who was working as Junior As ristant in the office of the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisit i rn), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. Ihe marriage between the petitioner and the deceased was :; rlemnized on I 2

18.01.1991 at Hyderabad, and he expired on 25.07.2004 in a road accident near Gandipet while in service, leaving behind the petitioner and their three minor daughters, T. Swetha, T. Sneha, and T. Priyanka, as legal heirs. During the subsistence of her marriage, her husband entered into a second marriage with respondent No.4, which is void in law, and through the said marriage, one daughter and two sons were born. The petitioner and the 4th respondent entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 23.01.2006, whereln the petitioner relinquished her right to claim family pension in favour of the 4th respondent and retained her right to seek compassionate appointment, and both agreed to share equally the service benefits such as DCRG, GPF, Group Insurance, arrears of salary, and other terminal benefits of the deceased.

4. Pursuant thereto, the 3'd respondent issued a Family Members Certificate vlde Proceedings No.D/1449l04, dated 22.05.2008 and a Community Certificate certifying that the petitioner belongs to the Mala Community. l'he petitioner, who studied up to 7rh class, registered her name with the Department of Employment and Training, A.P., Hyderabad under Registration No.G1/2008/01923, dated 19.05.2008 and holds Household Card No.WAP167333900752. The petitioner submitted an application before the 2nd respondent seeking compassionate 3' appointment. The 2nd respondent, through No.A4/7927 /2004-1, dated 22.O7.2008, directed ti Endorsement 3 petitioner to produce the original documents such as the death ,: rrtificate of her husband, legal heir certificate, caste certificat€ no-objection certificates from other family members, employr rent exchange card, and succession certificate. The petitioneI submitted all required documents except the no-objection ertificate and succession certlficate, which were not applicabl: in her case, as her daughters are minors and the 4th responde r t's marriage ls void in law. Despite this, the 2nd respondent failed :o consider the petitioner's application for compassionate appointmo rt on untenable and arbitrary grounds. The action of the 2nd resp: rdent is illegal and arbitrary. Aggrieved by the same, the petitior ( r has filed the present Writ Petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits :l at appropriate orders be passed in this Writ Petition by directing t re respondents to consider the representation submitted by the pel i ioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law withir a reasonable period.

6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without expres:;i rg any opinion on the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is dis6 csed of with a I I 4 direction to the Petitioner to make a fresh rePresentation to the of two ( 2 ) weeks from the date of respondents with in a Period receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation' to consider the same strictly in the respondents are directed accordance with law and Pass a period of eight (B) weeks thereafter' There shall be no order as to a ppropriate orders thereon within costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending' if any' in this Wiit Petltion, shalt stand closed. I I To, SD/- SRI M. JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, The State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, Hyderabad. 3. The Tahsildar, Bahadurpura, Revenue Mandal, Hyderabad. 4. One CC to SRI C. RAMESH SAGAR, Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana- IOUT]

6. bne CC to SRI RAVINDRA BHARATI, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies BN OV)- HlGH COURT DATED:04/1112025 o.J t ( t irlE S l4,€ 2 i'113 202[ C-,) 1):. \: - .-.,.- *o ORDER WP.No.19529 of 2008 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS CI 0 \