High Court · 2025

t. Q!, Kqnal(umar1, W/o late Sri Sika Ramesh age 49 years Occ Housewife r/o 404, D Block Sri Mahatakshmi Residency- upp6rpitiy, najenAemagir, Hyderabad -500048 2 gjkl'qLogjar.D/o Pooja D/o Late Sikha Ramesh Ase 27 Occ unerirployed r/o F.lat 404 D Block, Sri-Mahatakshmi Residency Upderappjlty, Rai""A;irrg;i Hyderabad -500048 ...PETITIONERS ANO 1 Union of lndia, R.ep by Compkoller and Auditor General of lndia g Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg New Delhi 1 101 24

2. The Accountant General (A and E), Telangana, Saifabad, Hyderabad Telangana State 500004

3. Senior Accounts officer (Ad11-r). Oio The Accountant General (A and E) Saifabad, Hyderabad -TS 500004 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondents to reconsider the applicition dt. 26.10.2022 and dt. 07.12.2022 ot the petitioner for re-evaluation and declare the orders dt. .22-03-2024 by CAT order dt. ON 211010512023 as arbitrary, unjust, and in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. R STEVEN JAI DEEP Counsel for the Respondents: SRI T. BALA JAYASREE SC FOR (A&E) The Court made the following: ORDER -r THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Writ Petition No. 34563 of 2024 ORDER: lt't, ttP H)tt bte sn Just(:e Abttttaid Kuttttr 'tL(ru!t) Aggrievecl bv the order, datecl 2'2'O3'2O21 ' passed in O.A.No.105 c,f 2023 by the Central Aclmlnistratl\'e Tribunal, Hrrclerabad Bench, Hvderabad(ibr sitort-,'the Tribunal'), the present Writ Petition is hled

2. Heard tiri R. Steven Jaideep, learnetl ccunsel appearing 1br the petitioners and T' Bala '.laYi'rsree' lr:arnecl Standing Coutrsel appeanng lbr the responclents

3. Learnecl counsel appearing tbr the pet itioner:; had contended that the husband o[ petitioner No L \vas working as /\sisistant Supervisor in the Offir:e ol Principal Accountant (ieneral (Audit) and he hzrs expired while ilischarging his duties on 04'tJ8'2O'21' Subsequentl-v' petitioner Nc,.12 (daughter of petitioner No' 1) has sut)mitted an applicatiorl lbr compassionate appolntmenL H()we\rer' the case o1 p,:titioner No.2 was considered :rncl [tit: s:rme was rejected try the Screening Commrttee uicle proce':clings, datecl 19.08 .2022. According to the Screening Comrntttee's ; , :iz w: 1 AI(S,.I & ETD.,I \t'I):t.r56:1 2021 evaluation. petitioner No.2 has secured only 40 points as agalnst rectuirement of 65 point cut off. Aggrieved bv the said reiection orders. dated 19.08.2022, the petitioners have approached the Tribunal bv hling O.A.No. 1O5 of 2023 and the Tribunal was pleased to dismiss the O.A. vide order. dateci 22.03.2024, without appreciating any of the contentions rarsed by the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel lor the petitioners had further contended that the Screening Committee has awarded only 40 points AS against 65 points cut off. Learned counsel had further contended that the Screening Committee has evaluated the points erroneously and rejected the case of petitioner No.2. The Tribunal ought to have directed the respondents to re-consider the case of petitioner No.2 and pass appropriate orders. instead of dismissing the O.A. Learned counsel lbr the petitioners has further contended that the points were awarded to the applicant based on the model evaluation system Ibr compassionate appointment and no wherc the policv specifies that as to how many marks one must sccurc to become eligible. Therefore, appropriatc orders be passed in the Writ Petition by setting -l \ I\:i..1 d. ta'Il).., rt) .i i(,.1 l0l+ asidetheordr:I',dated22'O3'2024passedin()A'No'l05of 2023bythe.I.ribunalandfurtherdirecttheresponclentsto re-consider the case of petitioner No'2 in terrrts rll the policy of the respondents and pass appropriate orciers in accordance with law' S. On the rll.her hand, Iearned Standing Counsel lor the respondents h,ld contended that the Screening Committee has not only r-ejected the case ot' the petitioncr' blLt has also re1ected ttte cases of several other candidiltes rl) ter;s oi the revised guidelines lbr awarding point s tbr compassionate appointment' Hence' the 'I'ribltnaI was .lustilied in clismissing the O'A' Therelbre' there are nc) merits in the Writ Petition and the same is; Iiable to be dismissed.

6. This Court, having considered the submissions macle bv both the parties, is of the view that the revisecl evaluation system 1br compassionate appolntment dlct not specily as to how many marks one must secLlre lo llr:<:ome eligible lbr crrmpassionate appolntment' more o\/('r' no lurther details; are provided rn the revise<-l gutclt:lines' Hence. the J'ribunal was not j ustiliecl in dismissrrtq the I I I 4 AI(S,.I & I]TD..I \{r .1456:1 2024 O.A.. the Tribunal ought to have directed the respondents to re-consider the case of petitioner No.2 and pass approprrate orders. Thereibre, order, dated 22.O3.2024 passed in C).A.No.105 of 2023 bv the Tribunal is liable to be sel asrde and accordingiy, it is set aside. The respondents .are directed to re-examine the case ol petitioner No.2 in terms of the policy of respondents for compassionate appointment and pass appropriate orders in accordance with [au.

7. With the above o bservations / directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

8. As a sequei. miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.L. VIJAYA LAXMI NT REGISTRAR ASSI CTION OFFICER The C_omptroller and Auditor General of lndia g Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg New Delhi 110124 The Accountant General (A and E), Telangana, Saifabad, Hyderabad Telangana State 500004 ' Senior Accounts officer (Admn), O/o The Accountant General (A and E) Saifabad, Hyderabad -fb SOOtiO+ One CC to SRl. R STEVEN JAI DEEP Advocate tOpUCI One CC to SRI T. BALA JAYASREE SC FOR (A&E) tOpUCI Two CD Copies To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 KKS BS s l , I t HIGH COURT DATED:2810112025 1tr'e Sl,\I ( J o o 2 5 rtB'?t25 t D51. 9.aiCv { t-. C I t': I ORDER WP.No.34563 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @J4^ q5