WP/9348/2005 of I. Kanaka Raju Vs The Managing Director on 26 December 2005

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner in substance seeks appointment to the employment of the APGENCOas the dependent of a medically invalidated employee of the said Corporation.

The petitioner’s father was working as a Plant Assistant in the Central StoresSection in the Thermal Station, Ramagundam after having joined service in theA.P.S.E.B as a Helper. His date of superannuation was 31-12-2007. However, as hewas suffering from knee pains he applied for relief of medical grounds, wasexamined by the Medical Board, a certificate granted to the effect that he is not fit forcontinue in service and he relieved from service by the issuance of a memo dated19-08-2002 and with effect from the said date. It is stated that the petitioner’s fatheralso died thereafter, on 13-09-2004.

Earlier the petitioner submitted a representation dated 28-08-2002 requestingappointment on compassionate basis. This was recommended by the DivisionalEngineer concerned on 28-08-2002 to the Superintending Engineer concerned.Thereafter the 2[nd] respondent by the proceedings dated 17-08-2004 rejected thepetitioner’s case on the basis of Government orders in G.O.Ms.Nos.202,203 and 305dated 27-04-2002, 27-04-2002 and 17-07-2002 respectively. However, coming toknow that the respondents had appointed some candidates who are children ofemployees retired on medical invalidation, the petitioner filed W.P.No.16076 of2004. By the order dated 09-09-2004 the writ petition was disposed of directing the2[nd] respondent to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation andexpeditiously.

After disposal of the writ petition the petitioner again represented on 28-09-2004seeking employment on compassionate basis. As the representation was notresponded to the petitioner also got issued a contempt notice. Eventually the 3[rd]respondent issued the impugned order dated 06-04-2005 which reads as under:- “ I am to invite attention to the ref. 3[rd] cited and to inform that in theG.O.Ms.No.202, dated 27-04-02, the Government of A.P has ordered to dispensewith the scheme of compassionate appointment to dependents of Governmentemployees who retire on medical invalidation in the light of the Hon’ble High Courtof A.P Judgment dtd.d12-10-01 in W.P.No.13489/2000 and batch that the schemeof compassionate appointment to dependents of Government employees whoretire on medical invalidation is unconstitutional and violative of the Article 16 of theConstitution of India. The said orders were adopted by APGENCO in memodtd.29-01-04 and all the heads of units in APGENCO were requested to follow theorders scrupulously issued in the G.O.Ms.No.202, dtd.27-04-02 along with other GOS referred therein.

In the circumstances explained above and in the light of the policy annunciated bythe Government in their orders in G.O.Ms.No.202 referred to above themanagement is constrained to reject the case of Sri E.Kanaka Raju son of SriE.Kistaiah, PA RTS, who retired on Medical Invalidation, for providing employmentunder the said scheme which is: and has been no longer inforce: and accordinglyhereby reject the case of Sri E.Kanaka Raju.”

It is now a settled principle that creating an exclusive avenue for publicemployment on compassionate basis for dependents of employees whoseservices were determined on the basis of medical invalidation, violates theexplicit injunctions of Article 16(1) of the Constitution. Descent alone is aprohibited basis for grant of public employment. This principle has already beendeclared by the judgment of this Court, which has been referred to, in theimpugned order. In the light of settled legal position the petitioner is not entitledto any relief.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

_________________

GODA RAGHURAM,J

Conclusion

30[TH] DECEMBER 2005

*TSNR