B.Lakshmaiah vs The Central Power Distribution Company ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 4850 AP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 4850 AP
Judgement Date : 27 June, 2024

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

B.Lakshmaiah vs The Central Power Distribution Company ... on 27 June, 2024

APHC010107512013
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
                                    PRADESH
                                                                 [3457]
                                 AT AMARAVATI
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

        THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE
             TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                               PRESENT
             THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
                 WRIT PETITION No: 25907 OF 2013
Between:
B.Lakshmaiah                                      ...Petitioner
                                 AND
The Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.,
And others                                      ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri D.Linga Rao

Counsel for the respondents: Sri P.Lakshma Reddy Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri Ld. Standing counsel for A.P.S.P.D.C.L.) Sri Y.Nagi Reddy Ld. Standing counsel for A.P.Transco

The Court made the following order:

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

standing counsel for the respondents.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was not considered for

compassionate appointment, though he was eligible in all

respects. The petitioner's father, working as a watchman in the

first respondent, died while in service. The petitioner was //2//

W.P. No.25907 OF 2013

adopted on 09.12.2012 by the wife of the deceased employee

(B. Venkata Ramudu). On the strength of the adoption deed, the

petitioner made a representation to the respondents seeking

appointment on compassionate grounds.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wife of the

deceased has no objection against the petitioner to get

employment on compassionate grounds, however, the first

respondent, vide proceedings dated 28.02.2012, rejected the

case of the petitioner on the ground that the adoption deed

submitted by B.Lakshmaiah (the petitioner herein) was not

legally registered.

4. The respondents in the counter submit that the adoption deed

must be on a stamp paper as per the Indian Stamp Act, 1899

and the adoption deed shall be registered as per the Indian

Registration Act, 1908. In view of non registration of the

adoption deed, it would be difficult to ascertain who can claim

service benefits of the deceased employee. More so, when the

adoption deed is not even on a stamp paper as per the Stamp

Act, there could be a case of rival claims submitting similar

adoption deeds for compassionate appointment.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of

the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Param Pal Singh through //3//

W.P. No.25907 OF 2013

Father v. National Insurance Company and another1, wherein

the Hon'ble Apex Court dealt with the issue of whether the

adoption deed is required to be registered or not and held that

the adoption deed does not fall under Section 17 of the

Registration Act, which refers to documents of which the

registration is compulsory. The Hon'ble Apex Court has gone

into the details of the evidence relied on before the competent

court relating to adoption and the other aspects involved in the

facts of that case.

6. Admittedly, in the present facts of the case, the claim of the

petitioner is solely based on an unstamped and unregistered

deed of adoption. The submission of the learned counsel that

the wife of the deceased employee has no objection to

compassionate appointment to the adopted son would be of

some relevance had the petitioner made efforts to either validate

the deed of adoption under the Stamp Act or has taken some

other legal steps to validate the deed of adoption.

7. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed off, granting

liberty to the petitioner to take steps to get the deed of adoption

validated legally and proof of adoption beyond reasonable doubt

of the respondents. The petitioner is further granted liberty to

(2013) 3 SCC 409 //4//

W.P. No.25907 OF 2013

make a fresh representation to the respondents seeking

compassionate appointment after complying with the above

directions. The respondents may consider the case of the

petitioner for compassionate appointment subject to the

availability of the vacancy. No costs.