Remanded

Sri.S.Srinivas Reddy, v. Union of India

Telangana HC24 Oct 2014WP/30444/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's order rejecting a claim for compassionate appointment. It held the impugned order liable to be set aside without adjudication on merits and remanded the matter for fresh consideration applicable only to compassionate appointment under the instructions and circulars existing on the date of the deceased employee's de

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Tribunal for fresh consideration under guidelines existing on the date of the employee's death; status quo ante maintained.

Sri.S.Srinivas Reddy, Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.30444 OF 2014

¶4

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)

¶5

This writ petition is filed challenging the order, dated 17.6.2014, in O.A.No.795 of 2012 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”).

¶6

2. Petitioner herein/applicant filed the aforementioned Original Application before the Tribunal to declare the order, dated 15.5.2012, of respondent No.3, which was communicated by respondent No.5 in Memos, dated 15.6.2012 and 20.6.2012; and Notification, dated 22.6.2012, issued by respondent No.5 as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, to direct the respondent authorities to consider his case for compassionate appointment in accordance with the instructions relevant and existing as on the date of the death of the deceased Government Servant.

¶7

3. The Tribunal, upon considering the material on record, disposed of the aforementioned Original Application by setting aside the order, dated 15.6.2012, and consequential notification, dated 22.6.2012, and with a direction to respondent No.5/competent authority to reconsider the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment for the post of Branch Postmaster, Pyalakurthy Branch Post Office, Kodumur Sub Post Office, Kurnool West Division, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh, as per the scheme and instructions on the subject with a reasoned order grating six weeks time from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Challenging the same, applicant filed the present Writ Petition.

¶8

4. Heard both sides.

¶9

5. The aforementioned Original Application was filed seeking compassionate appointment by the legal heir of a deceased employee, who died while in service. In accordance with the then existing Rules governing the subject, the applicant was appointed as temporary Branch Postmaster (Substitute), Pyalakurthy Branch Post Office, Kodumur Sub Post Office, Kurnool West Division, Kurnool District and is working as such till today. When he made an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds, it was rejected by taking into consideration the policy

¶10

guidelines with regard to the compassionate appointment, which were amended by the Central Government on 9.3.2012.

¶11

6. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the guidelines existing as on the date of the death of the deceased have not been taken into consideration for the purpose of adjudicating the dispute as to whether the applicant is entitled for compassionate appointment or not.

¶12

7. According to the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, the scheme, which was available as on the date of the cause of action, has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of deciding the issue as to whether the legal representative of the deceased is entitled for compassionate appointment or not.

¶13

8. This issue has not been considered by the Tribunal. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶14

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside impugned order and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with a request to dispose of the aforementioned Original Application afresh in accordance with law duly taking note of the instructions and circulars dealing with compassionate appointment as on the date of the death of the deceased employee. Till then, status quo as on today with regard to the employment of the petitioner/applicant shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶15

JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶16

JUSTICE ANIS Date: 24.10.2014 AMD

¶17

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶18

WRIT PETITION No.30444 OF 2014

¶19

DATE: 24.10.2014

¶20

AMD

Sri.S.Srinivas Reddy, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.S.Srinivas Reddy, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uppu Lingaiah Vs Andhra Bank

The Chief Operating Manager/Sc(Bg), Vs B.Tulasiraj

The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, Vs D.V.V. Nageswara Rao Reddy, S/o. D. Sambamurthy

Kakula Aruna Jyothi Vs State Bank of India, rep. by its Chief Manager/ Authorized

Doddi Simhachalam Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Kakula Aruna Jyothi Vs State Bank of India