Peravalli Lakshmi, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 799 AP

   THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                    WRIT PETITION NO.929 OF 2020
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:

"to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to accord necessary permission to the 3rd respondent to appoint the daughter of petitioner herein Peddinti Tushara on compassionate grounds as per her eligibility in the 4th respondent temple by setting aside the impugned Proceedings Rc.No.A1/11025(40)/5/2018 dated 21.06.2018 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.350 General Administration (Ser.A) Department dated 30.07.1999 and later Memo No.116147/Ser-A/2003-1, GA Department dated 08.10.2003 and also as per judgment of Honourable High Court in W.P.No.16242 of 2013 dated 20.06.2013."

It is the case of the petitioner that her husband Peravalli

Bhaskara Charyulu died on 09.02.2017 due to Heart Attack while

working as Upa Pradhana Archaka of Maddi Anjaneyaswamy

Temple, Guravaigudem Village, Jangareddygudem Mandal, West

Godavari District. He was drawing 2010 PRC scale and drawing a

salary of about Rs.33,000/- per month at the time of his death and

put in 32 years of service as on the date of his death. Respondent

No.4 has forwarded the representation of the petitioner to respondent

No.3 recommending her case for appointment on compassionate

ground due to untimely death of her husband late Bhaskara

Charyulu. Respondent No.3 vide his letter Rc.No.A2/4427/2017

dated 21.10.2017 sent the proposal seeking necessary permission to

appoint her daughter Peddinti Tushara on compassionate grounds.

Respondent No.4 vide his letter No.8/2017 dated 20.03.2018

clarified that there is a vacancy of Junior Assistant in the subject

temple and also the particulars of income of the temple to

respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 vide impugned proceedings

Rc.No.A1/11025/5/2018 dated 21.06.2018 rejected the application MSM,J WP_929_2020

of the petitioner on the ground that daughter viz. Peddinti Tushara is

married as such she is not eligible for appointment. The same is

now questioned on the ground that the marriage is not a bar in view

of G.O.Ms.No.350 General Administration (SER.A) Department dated

30.07.1999, where Government clarified that when there is only a

married daughter to the deceased Government employee without

older or younger brothers or sisters and the spouse of the deceased

Government employee is not willing to avail the compassionate

appointment, such married daughter may be considered for

compassionate appointment, provided she is dependent on the

deceased Government employee and subject to satisfying the other

conditions and instructions issued on the scheme from time to time,

but this was not taken into consideration, erroneously rejected the

request of the petitioner for appointment of her daughter on

compassionate ground.

During hearing, Sri G.L.V.Ramana Murthy, learned counsel on

behalf of Sri S.N.Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that as per G.O.Ms.No.350 General Administration

(SER.A) Department dated 30.07.1999 married daughter can also be

considered for appointment on compassionate ground and in

"Commissioner of Police v. K.Padmaja1", the High Court of Andhra

Pradesh at Hyderabad clarified the similar situation while holding

that the married daughter can also be appointed on compassionate

ground, subject to satisfying other requirements contained in

G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999. In view of the law declared in the

judgement (referred supra) and the clarification issued by the

Government in G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999, the impugned

rejection order is illegal, requested to set aside the same while

(2013) 4 ALT 501 MSM,J WP_929_2020

directing respondent No.2 to issue necessary proceedings for

appointment of the petitioner in any suitable post on compassionate

ground.

Sri K.Madava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent

No.4, submitted that rightly or wrongly the recommendation was

made to respondent No.2 for appointment of the daughter of the

petitioner on compassionate ground in a suitable post, but

respondent No.2 rejected the same recording a reason, since, the

daughter of the petitioner is a married daughter she is disentitled to

claim appointment on compassionate ground, requested to dismiss

the writ petition.

Learned Government Pleader for Endowments Department

would contend that the respondents will consider the request of the

petitioner for appointment of her daughter in view of the law laid

down by the Division Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh at

Hyderabad in "Commissioner of Police v. K.Padmaja" (referred

supra) and G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999, requested to pass

appropriate order.

The petitioner is the wife of Peravalli Bhaskara Charyulu and

Peddinti Tushara is the daughter of the deceased and the petitioner

herein, who is married on the date of death of her father. She sought

appointment on compassionate ground in any suitable post

consequent upon the death of her father being the only daughter

without any brother or sister. But the same was rejected by

respondent No.2 on the ground that she is married daughter.

As per G.O.Ms.No.350 General Administration (SER.A)

Department dated 30.07.1999, when there is only a married

daughter to the deceased Government employee without older or

younger brothers or sisters and the spouse of the deceased MSM,J WP_929_2020

Government employee is not willing to avail the compassionate

appointment, such married daughter may be considered for

compassionate appointment, provided she is dependent on the

deceased Government employee and subject to satisfying the other

conditions and instructions issued on the scheme from time to time.

In view of the said G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999, the

married daughter can also be considered for appointment on

compassionate ground where there are no younger or elder sisters or

brothers and the wife of the deceased is not willing to avail such

opportunity. Based on the same G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999,

the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at

Hyderabad in "Commissioner of Police v. K.Padmaja" (referred

supra) held as follows:

"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. 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."

In view of the principle laid down by the Division Bench in

"Commissioner of Police v. K.Padmaja" (referred supra), the MSM,J WP_929_2020

married daughter of the petitioner is entitled for appointment,

subject to fulfilling the other conditions.

Recently, the High Court of Allahabad in "Manjul Srivastava

v. State of U.P.2" reiterated the same principle that even a married

daughter is entitled for appointment on compassionate ground.

In view of the law declared by the Division Bench of the High

Court of Andhra Pradesh in "Commissioner of Police v.

K.Padmaja" (referred supra), and persuaded by the principle laid

down by the High Court of Allahabad in "Manjul Srivastava v.

State of U.P." (referred supra), I find that rejection of request of the

petitioner for appointment of her daughter Peddinti Tushara on

compassionate ground for the reason that she is the married

daughter of deceased government servant, is illegal and contrary to

G.O.Ms.No.350 dated 30.07.1999. Consequently, the writ petition

deserves to be allowed.

In the result, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the

impugned proceedings issued by respondent No.2 in

Rc.No.A1/11025(40)/5/2018 dated 21.06.2018. Consequently,

respondent No.2 is directed to appoint Peddinti Tushara, daughter of

the deceased Peravalli Bhaskara Charyulu and the petitioner herein,

in any suitable post on compassionate grounds, within six (6) weeks

from today, if she is eligible for such appointment subject to fulfilling

the other conditions for such compassionate appointment. No costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 12.02.2021 Ksp

2021(1)ADJ433