High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavrl filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to lssue an appropriate writ, order or Directiorr rnore particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner's family members (T.Bhanu prasad) under the Breadwinner Scheme, as arbitrary, illegal, and u nconstitutiona I Consequently direct the respondents to provide suitable employment to one of the petitioner's children especially to T. Bhanu Prasad under the Breadwinner Scheme, treating the petitioner's husband Late T. Bakkanna as having died while in harness. lA NO: 1 oF 2025 Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in tl r circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cc urt may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitroner dt. 17-4-2025 and 16-7-202s arong with no objection of thr: affidavit of the famiry members for appointment of T.Bhanu prasad into a suitable post on compassionate g rou nd. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI p.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: SRI U.SHANTHI Bt. SHAN RAO, SC FOR TGSRTC Counsel for the Respondent No.S: Gp FOR SERVICES_I The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.29349 oF 2o25 ORDER: With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. 2, This Writ Petition is hled under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: '...to issue dn appropiate Wi\ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nqture of Mandamus declaing the actiol of the respondents in not prouiding compqssionate appointment to the petittoner's familg members (T.Bhanu Prasad) under the Breadluittner Scheme, crs arbitrary, iLlegal, qnd unconstitutioral; Conseqttent[y direct the respondents to proutde suitable emplogment to one of the petitioner's childret especiallA to T.Bhqnu Prqsad under the Breadluinner Scheme, treating tLrc petitioners husbqnd L<tte T.Bakkanna as having died while in hamess; Pass..."

3. Heard Sri P.Venkateshwer Rao, learned coLlnsel for the petitioner; Sri U.Shalthi Bushan Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Telangara State Road Tralsport Corporation, appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4; and learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent No.5

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner's husband was working as Conductor in Zaheerabad 2 PK,.J \r'p 29349 2025 Bus Depot, he rvas removed from service utde pr )ceedings dated

09.09.2016. Aggrieved by the same, the petiti,) 1er hled appeal and revieu. petition and the sarne were rejectec. Therefore, the petitioner preferred III Level petition before respc edent No.2 and uide proceedings dated 09.08.2018, respondenl. No.2 reinstated the petitioner into service modifzing the runishment to 'deferment of alnual increment for a period fol a period of two years with cumulative effect' by treating the int rrvening period from the date of removal till reinstatement a 3 'Not as Duty'. Hou,ever, the petitioner's husband could not re: )rt to duty due to serious illness axd he was subsequer 1 y expired on

21.1O.2024. As such, the petitioner submitted z representation to respondent No.3 on 17.O4.2O25 and 16.07.2C! 5 requesting to provide employment to her younger son on compassionate grounds and the salne are pending considera.j rn. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to direct res: rndent No.3 to consider the representations dated 17.O4.2O25 : nd 16.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropria.r orders, within a reasonable time 3 PK..I wp 293+9 2025

5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos l to 4 submits that respondent No.3 will consider the representations of the petitioner dated L7.04'2125 and 16.07'2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law'

6. Having regard to the submissions made by 'learned counsel for the respective parties and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to pass appropriate orders on the representations dated

17.O4.2025 and, 16.07'2025 submitted by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate a copy of the same to the petitioner. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sha'll stand closed' There shall be no order as to costs //TRUE COPY// SD/-A. JAYASR S TANT RE AR ECTION OFFICER The . Managing Director, Telangana Musheerabad, Hyderabad. State Road ransport Corporatron, To, 1

2. The Executrve Director, (O), .Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, 3. The Regional Manager, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, Medak Hyderabad, at MGBS, Hyderabad. " Region, at Sanga Rddoy. Sanjareoay oisiiiil- - 4 The Depot Manager, TGSRfC, Zaheerabad Bus Depot 5. The Principal Secretary, Transport Department, secretariat Hyderabad, T S 6 One CC to SRI P.VENKATESWAR RAO, Advocate [OPUC] T One CCto SRI U SHANTHI BUSHAN RAO, SC FORTGSiIC [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FoR SERVICES-|, High Court for the Stir : of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 9 Two CD CoPies BSR BS HIGH COURT DATED: 2St09t2O2S I \ ORDER WP.No.29349 of 2O2S \ ,/ i \,\ u 4 Lic i06 I r,,.-. . ,, ^.,.q.r._ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS \ \r-- ()/