- (1.)This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned Memo No.B3/1074/2008 dated 01.10.2008 issued by the respondent No.2, as illegal, arbitrary and ultravires to the provisions of the A.P. Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff Patterns and Pay Structure Act, 1994 and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same. A consequential direction is sought to the respondents to forthwith provide suitable employment to the petitioner on compassionate basis without reference to Clause 4 of G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008.
(2.)The father of the petitioner, late Manik Rao, was killed in extremist violence in the year 1993. In that connection an FIR.No.10 of 1993 was registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 read with Section 149 IPC; Section 25 I (a) of the Indian Arms Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the TADA Act on the file of the Bazarhathnoor Police Station, Adilabad District. An application was submitted by the mother of the petitioner way back in the year 1994 seeking compassionate appointment but it was informed that there is no scheme for providing employment to the dependants of the victim of the extremist violence. The then Government of Andhra Pradesh introduced scheme of compassionate appointment to provide employment to the dependant family members of the deceased vide G.O.Ms.No.469 dated 08.11.1996. As per G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008, there is a scheme for providing employment if the death occurred prior to 26.02.1996. Petitioner made an application on 08.09.2008 in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.504 dated 11.08.2008.
(3.)The aforesaid application was rejected vide Memo No.D3/1074/2008 dated 01.10.2008 by the then District Collector but according to the petitioner the same was not communicated to him at any point of time. The petitioner stated that he was informed that, in similar circumstances, WP.No.24117 of 2010 was allowed on 26.11.2020; WA.No.69 of 2012 preferred by the Government was dismissed on 24.01.2012 and after disposal of SLP.No.9521 of 2014, which is pending, the case of the petitioner would be considered. In the first week of November 2018, the petitioner came to know through one Vaman Munde, family member of the one of the victims, that the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP and pursuant to the same, several persons were provided employment. On 10.11.2018, the petitioner requested the respondent No.2 to provide employment but he was informed that his application was rejected long back and he was not eligible for employment. After several representations, the respondent No.2 provided copy of the memo dated 01.10.2008, which was not communicated earlier to the petitioner. Petitioner stated that several similarly placed dependants of the victims of the extremist violence were provided employment pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in WP.No.24022 of 2017 and batch on 11.12.2017. The petitioner further stated that following the decisions of this Court in WP.No.24117 of 2010 dated 06.11.2010, WA.No.69 of 2012 dated 23.02.2012 and WP.No.24022 of 2015 and batch dated 11.12.2017, this Court allowed WP.No.25827 of 2012 and batch vide order dated 16.04.2018.