tril.srinath Chari v. 1. State of Telangana

Counsel for the petiti,rner : SRI POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondents : Gp FOR SERVICES- The Court made the fc,lrr>wing ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITIO N No.35955 of2OL6 ORDER:

1. Heard Mr. P.Amarender, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-ll for respondents. Perused the record.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that his brother, Late M. Chandra Sekhar, a Senior Assistant in the Palchayat Raj Department at Hyderabad, died on duty in a road accident at Erragadda Signal on November 1"t,2O10. At the time of his death, the deceased was unmarried and was finalcially supporting his family consisting of his mother, Smt.M.Anasuya aged 74 years old, the petitioner and his brother, M.Murali, u,ho is also unmarried and mentall-v unsound. Additionally, the petitiondr has a brother, M' Biskhapathi (52 years old), who is married and employed privately. The petitioner's two sisters, M. Jayalaxmi and M' Jyothi, are married and living with their respective in-laws, having no connection with the family. The petitioner states that his brother, M. Murali is a unemployed and is mentally unsound. He further stated that they belong to Backri'at I (llasses (B.C.) communitl. and h,: hz s cirmpleted the 9th ur:r'l e,

3. L nrle'r the aforesaid circumstances, l)c titioners mother sL l>mitted an application to thc D,ivisional Panchz r Lt Cfficer, Ranga Redd-v East, Rz.ngz Reddy District. rrr 15.07.20 I 1 requesting to consrder rhr case of petitiorLe t r,r providing employment on coi n pa ssionate grounds. l is submitted that the Districr pe nchayat Officer, l?anga Reddy District, addresr;e'd Letter Roc.No 7i)(t '20l1-A1 (Pts), dated O9.03.2O 12, r:qu,:sting to issue <:1:rrif r:ation whether the petitioner is elig,ibte for appointn-elli under compassionate grounds. H: sr bmitted anothel rr 1>resentation to the Vi 17 .O9 .2O' ) along with all certificates in clu,tn€ lamil5r membe -s c ertificate, no cbjection c ertiltc.a .e. no resp rrrd:nt on employrn,'n1 certificate, etc., requesting to c,rnstder his case for co rrpassionate appointment consequent on the death of i-ris brother while in service. [t is submit,ed that the Dist:.ir, t Panchayat Officer, Ranga Redc r. )istrict, submitte ri ris age proof certificate and n() o )jection certificate c1 ,amily members in Roc.No.70O t,20 l7 1,,1 (pts), - 1 l-- dated 20.12.2012 to take further action in the matter. It is pertinent to mention that the Addl. MRO, Ranga Reddy District, conducted an enquiry for giving a Financial Status Certificate on 16.O5.2O 1 1, u.herein they stated that the petitioner is unemployed. But the certificate dated 17 .06.2011 shows that the petitioner is privately employed, which is factually incorrect as per the panchanama recorded by the ARI, Balanagar.

4. Despite this, the Covernment issued Memo No. 1 4862 / E .VIll I Al / 20 1 2, dated 02.O4.2O | 3, rejecting the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment on the untenable ground that both the petitioner and his elder brother are earning members of the family. This reasoning contradicts the provisions outlined in Para 2(11 of G.O.Ms.No.612, dated 30.10. 199 1, which stipulates that an unmarried brother may be considered for compassionate appointment if there are no other earning members in the family. Furthermore, the Deputy Collector & District Panchayat Officer (FAC) submitted proposal for the petitioner's compassionate appointment to the 2nd respondent on 09.02.2016. However, this proposal was GIP D + f reject€.cl I \ the 2"d respondent through .v{en Lo dated

22.O4.21)l(, citing the earlier rejection dated 02.O. .2O13 as the rr:atl;ot r and the sarne \ 7as commltnicale( to the petitro'rt,r r ile memo dated 14.06.2016.

5. L.c, -r-e d counsel for the petitioner m:Lde submissions on the lrnc s of ri,,ri t alfidavit and requeste.d t-lrs Court to set-asiC(' t1r,: i6pqgr"d orders and direct rhe rcspondents to corrsici . r the case ol the petitioner- bv I,roviding emplo,\r enI under compassionate gr runls AS expedit ic rrr; ... as possible

6. Per cctrtra learned counsel tbr resporLdent Nc.4 filed counte'- illl javit stating that the government ltaci rejected the petit: ln tr's request for compassionate ilpp()iltt nent on

02.O4.2O,i:; The rejection was based on the trrer;ence of earninE tne rrbers in the family. which <:onlrad,cts the provisic,n:; :f G.O.Ms.No.612, dated 30.10..99 It is further sr a ,,),1 that the petitioner was issuer.l a no earning membe - certilicate on 24.7O.2O1a1, in licating unemplor n-r,:.1t. However, local sources revealed thz t at the time ol tltr financial status certificate er qui 1,, the petition,rr \,ras privately employed. Subseqtrent 1r,., rhe 5 Deputy Collector & District Panchayat Officer (FAC) proposed the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment on Og .O2.2016. Nevertheless, the 2nd respondent rejected the proposal on 22.O4'2016, citing the earlier rejection and the employment status of the petitioner's elder brother, M. Bikshapathi, as a private employee. According to the guidelines, an appointment cannot be granted if there is any other earning member in the family. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the u'rit petition' 7 . Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a reply affidavit contending that his elder brother M Bikshapathi aged about 52 years was married, living separately and was a private employee having no connection with the family. Therefore, the rejection order dated O2'O4'2O13' is totally non-application of mind. The MRO Tahsildar has issued no earning member certificate on 24 'lO 2Ol3 stating the petitioner as unemployed and the same was admitted by the respondents themselves' As such' they are bound to consider his case. He further stated that consequent to the revised financial status certificate ' the Divisional Panchayat Officer, submitted revised proposals - for provirir r g compassionate appointmenr, ar rcl I hc same \,rrere 1ei:cle d vide letter dated 22.04.2016 or. th,r ground that thr, ( rr)\,€rrh€ot had already rejected ris proposal earlier d t:rr[ 02.04.2O13. The rejection orclr:rs ssu:d b,v 2.d respond:rllt are r,vithout examining the revised proposals of the D s rir t Collector, Ranga Reddy daled 09)2.2016, u.here u,rdr r'. he categoricallv mentioned that tne I etitioner is not 'r,,r.<i-rg and their family status is poor. It i; further st:rted tl L:rt the respondents rejected his cas,_. u tder the mistakel trtpression that the petitioner is earring member in the [a;-ni r'. Subsequently, after enquiry ther for rnd that there isi ]'(r ),1rning member in his family. TI,rere fore , praved to conr;ir cr his case for appointment on cornpassionate grounds

8. A p:trrsal of the record would disclose ttat even S per the crl)r.-s1[er afhdavit of respondent No.4, the br other ol the pe1 it io.-. r r died in the year 2O 10, r.r,hile in sen,ice Further , j t is admitted by the respond ent s | 1at the petrtlonel unemployeC as cn 24.10.2013. B,_' that as it ma,v, p(.ti,io rers elder brother namely M.BikshiLpal hi, rvho was a f 1 \':- te employee u.as living separa[eh, ha ring no 1 connection with the family' Therefore, the impugned orders dated 02.04.2013,22-04.2016 and 14'06'2016 are liable to be set-aside. g. Having considered the respective submlssions, and perusing the record, this Court is of the vien'that the case of the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration for compassionate appointment and therefore deems it lit to exercise discretion under extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India' 1O. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated O2'O4 2Ol3' 22.04.2016 and 14.06-2016 are set aside, and the r'vrit petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds, 'a'ithin a period ol eight u'eeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' No costs' Miscellaneous applications pending' if any' shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD PUTY REGISTRAR D SECTION OFFICER To pment DePartment, Telangana, Hydera bad

1. The PrinciPal Sec retary, PanchaYat Raj and Rural Secretariat, State of Tela ngana at Hyderabad 2- The Commissione r for PanchaYat Raj and Ru ial EmPloYment,, State of 3. The Di strict Collector, Rang a ReddY District 4. Th 5. Two CCS tO GP FOR SERVICES -II, High Court for the State of Telangana at 6. One 7. Two CD CoPies e District Panchayat Officer, Rang a Redd y District ODATTU AMARENDER, Advocate [OPUC] Hvd erabad. [OUT] CC to SRI PO SA GIP D ,4,/. <, -a-= l\' i HE sz ) : i-, \,i 2lt;uru M (. )'i . ,..,,/ HIGH COUIR'T' DATED:231A412025 ORDER WP.No.35955 of 2016 DISPOSINCi I:IF THE W.P wlTHouT c:6c15. I6\q vr