MANAGING DIRECTOR ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION MUSHIRABAD HYDERABAD Vs. M B PANNA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge wherein the learned single Judge has been pleased to direct the respondent-authority to consider the case of the petitioner's son for any suitable post as and when he applied for the post to be filled in by notification or as per his qualifications in accordance with law.

(2.) The contextual facts depict that the petitioner retired form service on medical grounds in the year 1991 and at the time of his retirement, there was a Circular prevalent being Circular No.PD. 124 of 1986 dated 7-11-1986, in terms of which sons of the employees were permitted to be absorbed on to the rolls of the Corporation. But subsequently, in 1995, such a circular was withdrawn.

(3.) Be that as it may; the writ petitioner, on the basis of his retirement on medical grounds in 1991, filed the writ petition seeking employment to his son in 1997, after about a lapse of six years, though some representations said to have been filed in the meantime. But the learned single Judge has been pleased to direct consideration of the candidature of the petitioner's son. We are, however, unable to record our concurrence with the submissions of the learned Advocate appearing for the respondent-writ petitioner that the circular of 1986, that was in force, ought to govern the case of the petitioner. The Circular has been withdrawn subsequently and no right can accrue to the petitioner on the basis of a Circular which was withdrawn as early as 1995. Further, the delay of about six years has also not been explained in any way. The learned single Judge, however, without noticing the above aspects of the matter, which have been highlighted by the learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal, has been pleased to direct consideration of the case of the petitioner's son. In our view, the order under appeal cannot be sustained. The appeal, therefore succeeds. The order of the learned single Judge is set aside and quashed. No order as to costs.