Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 461 (AP)

Commissioner of Police v. K. Padmaja

2013-06-20

A.V.SESHA SAI, R.SUBHASH REDDY

body2013
JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J. The respondents in O.A.No.6938 of 2012 have filed this writ petition, aggrieved by the order dated 04.12.2012, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in the said O.A. By the aforesaid order, the Tribunal has allowed the application filed by the respondent herein by setting aside the proceedings issued by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City in Rc.No.L&O/E3/649/2010, dated 25.11.2010, with a direction to the petitioners herein to appoint the respondent/applicant, to a suitable post taking into consideration her educational qualifications and community. The father of the respondent/applicant by name Sri K.Ramachandra Raju worked as Head Constable in Amberpet Police Station, Hyderabad City. He died while in service on 02.04.2010, leaving behind his widow and three married daughters. The respondent herein is the eldest of the three daughters. The respondent and her mother made application seeking appointment of the respondent on compassionate grounds as per the scheme notified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.687, dated 03.10.1977 which was later clarified extending the benefit even to a married daughter by G.O.Ms.No.350, dated 30.07.1999, Memo No.116417/Ser.A/2003-1, dated 08.10.2003 and Memo No.406/10/A.1/Admn.11/2004, dated 20.03.2004. But the said application is rejected by a three line order by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad vide Memo No.L&O/E3/649/2010, dated 25.11.2010, stating that as per rules , the respondent is not eligible for compassionate appointment. Challenging the said memo, the respondent/applicant approached the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the case of the petitioners herein is that as per the instructions issued by the Finance Department vide Memo No.406/10/A.1/Admn.11/2004, dated 20.03.2004, unless the married daughter is dependent on her mother/father, she is not entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds. Considering the contentions advanced before the Tribunal and referring to the reports submitted by the Station House Officer, Ghatkesar Police Station, as per the instructions of the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city, wherein it is reported that the applicant is residing with her husband in the house of her late father along with her mother and both the applicant and her husband are unemployees and are financially week, the Tribunal recording a finding that there is no reason to reject the claim of the applicant and allowed the O.A, while setting aside the impugned proceedings therein vide R.C.No.L&O/E3/649/2010, dated 25.11.2010. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties, and perused the material on record including the additional material papers placed before this Court today. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties, and perused the material on record including the additional material papers placed before this Court today. In this writ petition, it is submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Advocate General that the respondent is not entitled for any appointment on compassionate grounds, as she did not place any material to show that she was dependent on her father. It is further submitted that further enquiries revealed that she is not staying along with her mother who is the wife of the deceased and is staying separately. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that as per the scheme notified by the Government, even married daughters are entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds and that the applicant as well as her husband, who were, unemployed, were dependant on the deceased employee. As per the scheme notified by the Government, since the benefit of compassionate appointment to the children of the deceased employee was extended to married daughters also, to rescue the family from immediate financial troubles, the respondent/applicant is entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds. When the petitioners herein rejected the claim of the respondent/applicant without recording any reasons, on the application filed by her, the Tribunal considered the matter by the order impugned and issued directions, which are in accordance with the scheme and there is no reason to interfere with the same. As evident from the scheme notified by the Government, the dependant children of a deceased Government servant who dies in harness are eligible for compassionate appointment to the Ministerial posts, such as Clerks, Typists, Steno-typists etc. When a doubt had arisen whether a married daughter can be considered to extend the benefit of compassionate appointment, it is clarified in the orders issued by the Government itself in G.O.Ms.No.350, dated 30.07.1999 and further orders dated 08.10.2003 issued in memo No.116417/Ser.A/2003-1, that married daughters are entitled for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds, subject to eligibility as per the scheme notified in this regard. A certificate issued by the Spl. Grade Deputy Collector, Ranga Reddy District is placed on record certifying the financial position of the applicant as unsound. A certificate issued by the Spl. Grade Deputy Collector, Ranga Reddy District is placed on record certifying the financial position of the applicant as unsound. Even in the report submitted by the Station House Officer, Ghatkesar, in clear terms it is stated that the applicant and her husband were living in the house of the deceased Sri K.Ramachandra Raju and were also taking care of widow of Sri K.Ramachandra Raju. Basing on the additional material placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, before this Court to-day, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that the applicant and her husband were staying separately with their own income. A perusal of report dated 15.06.2013 makes it clear that the husband of the applicant is an unemployee. Even with regard to income of the applicant, it is clearly stated that she is staying in the out house of house bearing No.2-2-12/6, D.D.Colony, Amberpet, Hyderabad and is eking livelihood by suing clothes. There is no other material to reject the claim of the applicant as she is not having definite income of her own and she was dependant on her late father. Even if the applicant is residing in a separate house, that by itself, is not a ground to reject the claim of appointment. So far as the income of the applicant is concerned, it is proved that she is not having any independent income to live on her own and she is also taking care of her mother (widow of the deceased employee). No valid reasons were recorded by the authorities, to reject the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment. Even by way of counter, no reasons were added to support the order passed by the authorities. Except the contention of the petitioners that the respondent is getting some income by suing clothes and residing separately in an outhouse, and, a vague report placed on record to-day, there is no other material to show that she is having definite income on her own. Even as per the said applicant’s report, husband is stated to be unemployed. Yet another defence is taken by the learned counsel that as the wife of the deceased is getting family pension, the applicant is not entitled for compassionate appointment. But the same cannot be accepted. Even as per the said applicant’s report, husband is stated to be unemployed. Yet another defence is taken by the learned counsel that as the wife of the deceased is getting family pension, the applicant is not entitled for compassionate appointment. But the same cannot be accepted. Merely because family pension is being paid to the wife of the deceased, the same is not a ground to deprive the benefit of compassionate appointment under this scheme notified by the Government for the children of the deceased who die in harness. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any valid ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks time to comply the directions issued by the Tribunal and to issue appointment order to the applicant. In view of the request, two months time is extended from today to comply the directions by issuing an appointment order to the applicant. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. No costs.