D SREERAMULU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Questioning the order dated 3-5-1997 passed by the fourth respondent in Memo D.Dis.No.4068/96-A-III, whereunder the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground by relaxing the age was rejected, the present Writ Petition is filed.

(2.) Though the writ petition is coming up for admission from the last weekof December, 1997, the respondents did not choose to file any counter in this case. On 9-3-1998 I passed the following order. "Print the name of Sri K. Raghavendra Reddy for R-4 and Post on 23-3-1998, in the mean time counter, if any." Again when the case is listed to-day, a request was made on behalf of respondents to adjourn the case to enable them to file counter. I have gone through the orders passed by the respondents. By filing a counter, the case of the respondents cannot be improved, as the order rejecting the case of the petitioner is a self-explanatory one. Hence, the request is rejected.

(3.) Now, I proceed to examine the merits of the case. The petitioner's fatherwho was working as teacher in Baddalapuram village, Anantapur District died on 3-12-1984. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was a minor being 14 years old at that point of time. Even then the petitioner made a representation on 18-5-1985 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds and the same seemed to have been forwarded by the Mandal Development Officer in his letter LS.No.2295/85 dated 7-11 -1985. But, the fourth respondent did not move in the matter for a long time. In the mean time the petitioner made another representation on 15-4-1988. On that, the fourth respondent in his proceedings in L.Dis.2501/88-A5, dated 25-5-1988 rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the application was not filed within one year from the date of his father's deatn and he was a minor at that point of time. Thereafter, the petitioner seemed to have made a representation to the District Development Officer once again explaining the pitiable conditions. But, that was rejected by the District Development Officer in his endorsement L.Dis.3559/93 A-5, dated 22-4-1993 stating that the petitioner's request for appointment on compassionate ground cannot be considered because of ban on filling up the posts. Once again the petitioner seemed to have approached the District Collector who ordered a detailed enquiry whether the petitioner submitted application on 18-5-1985 within one year from the death of his father. Pursuant to the enquiry ordered by the Collector, the Mandal Revenue Officer informed the fourth respondent in his proceedings Rc.No.l92/93(D) dated 18-5-1993 admitting that the petitioner applied for appointment on 8-11-1985 and the same was forwarded to the Zilla Praja Parishad, Anantapur under Registered Post No.1133 dated 8-11-1985, This report is based on the entries made in the despatch register as well as the personal register of the concerned clerk relating to the year 1985. Subsequently, the Mandal Revenue Officer submitted another report about the plight of the petitioner in his report dated 17-7-1993. It is useful to extract the relevant portion of the report.