BASAVA SRINIVAS Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dr. Sastry Jandhyala, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri S. Raju, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I.

(2.) The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under:

(3.) One Smt. B. Saraswati Devi, while working as Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Tanuku Circle-1, had died in harness on 6/2/2018; that the deceased employee is survived by the husband, who had been receiving pension, after having superannuated from a private bank (M/s. Karur Vysya Bank); that the retired husband receives Rs.15,000.00 per month as pension from M/s. Karur Vysya Bank; the deceased employee is also survived by two sons and one daughter; that the family members have given consent/no objection in favour of the Writ Petitioner, who is the youngest son, for securing a job under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme (Ex.P.3); that the Income Certificate issued by the Tahsildar bearing Roc.No.465/2018/B, dtd. 12/7/2018 (Ex.P.5) would also indicate that there are no other sources of income to the family; that on the strength of the consent letters/no objection certificate given by the family members and the Income Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, the Writ Petitioner herein had submitted his Application; that since the Application was not being considered, the Writ Petitioner has approached the Respondent Authorities and made several oral requests; that the Writ Petitioner has also submitted a Written Representation on 18/7/2018 (Ex.P.6); that by Order (titled as endorsement) dtd. 24/9/2018 (Ex.P.7-Colly) which was again reconfirmed by Order (titled as endorsement) dtd. 14/12/2018 (Ex.P.7-Colly), the Respondent Authorities have rejected the Application of the Writ Petitioner, seeking Compassionate Appointment, on two grounds namely: (i) that the Writ Petitioner is age barred, and, (ii) that he is not entitled for Compassionate Appointment as per the conditions laid down in Circular Memo No.3548/Ser.G/A2/2010-8, dtd. 24/3/2012; that according to the Respondents, this Circular Memo dtd. 24/3/2012 would stipulate that, if anyone of the parent is a "service pensioner" and is receiving pension, such pension shall be treated as family earning and that such pensioner is treated as an "earning member"; and that such Rejection Orders were passed on 24/9/2018 and 14/12/2018 (Ex.P.7-Colly) by placing reliance on the Circular Memo dtd. 24/3/2012 while the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short the "Tribunal") had in fact set aside the said Circular Memo No.3548/Ser.G/A2/2010-8, dtd. 24/3/2012 way back on 20/2/2018 in O.A.No.3012/2015 (Ex.P.10);