WP/34115/2011 of B. Vaishnavi Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Chairman / on 30 December 2011

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learnedstanding counsel for the respondents Corporation.

This writ petition has been filed by the two minor children,representing through their paternal grand father, seeking a direction tothe official respondents 1 and 2 not to release any death benefits andnot to give any compassionate appointment in favour of the 3[rd]respondent, who is none other than the natural mother of the minorchildren, and to release the same in their favour.

According to the petitioners, brief facts of the case are that oneEedhanna, who is father of the minor children, joined as Conductor inthe respondents Corporation and was got murdered in connivance ofwith his wife, Smt. B.Jagadeshwari, 3[rd] respondent. It is submitted that the grand father of the minorchildren, who is representing in the present writ petition on behalf ofthe minor children, reliably came to know that the 3[rd] respondent re-married with one Golla Ravi and they are now livingseparately, leaving the minor children with him and further he alsocame to know that she made a representation before the 2[nd]respondent, Depot Manager, for grant of death benefits andcompassionate appointment of his deceased son. Explaining theabove circumstances, the grand father of the minor children stated to have made a representation on 09.08.2010 requesting not to grant anydeath benefits and compassionate appointment in favour of the 3[rd]respondent but to release the same in favour of minor children. As therespondents did not initiate any action on the said representation, thepetitioners filed the present writ petition.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that theminor children are in custody of their paternal grand father. As theirgrand father is old age and having no sufficient means to give goodeducation and food and even not in a position to maintain the minorchildren, the death benefits and other monetary benefits may bereleased in the name of the minor children with the permission towithdraw the interest accrued thereon.

On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for therespondents Corporation would submit that all the benefits will have tobe calculated and paid to the persons who are nominees of thedeceased as per the records available with the Corporation. However,he submits that on behalf of the minor petitioners, their grant father stated to have made a representation on 09.08.2010. Therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider the same andpass appropriate orders.

In that view of the matter, without going into the merits of thecase, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2[nd] respondent, Depot Manager, to consider the representation statedto have been made by the grant father of the minor petitioners on09.08.2010 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two months, from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Thereshall be no order as to cots.

Date: 30.12.2011LSK

________________________JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH