1

*HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

+WRIT PETITION No.25156 of 2022

Between:

#Metla Deena Margaret ...PETITIONER

AND

$The Sate Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON 28.03.2025

THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers

may be allowed to see the Judgments?

- Yes -

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law

Reporters/Journals

- Yes -

3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair

copy of the Judgment?

- Yes -

___________________________________

DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

2

* THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

+WRIT PETITION No.25156 of 2022

% 28.03.2025

# Between:

#Metla Deena Margaret ...PETITIONER

AND

$The Sate Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri J. Ravi Kumar

! Counsel for Respondents: GP for Services-I

<Gist :

>Head Note:

? Cases referred: 1. WP No.35294/2014 dated 19.3.2021

2. 1994 AIR SCW 2305

APHC010406342022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 25156/2022

Between:

Metla Deena Margaret

The Sate Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.

J RAVI KUMAR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

GP FOR SERVICES I

The Court made the following:

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

the following relief:

“….to

o issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS

declare the proceedings of 3rd respondent in proceedings REC No

Dt 25/07/2022 as illegal and contrary to the g

violative Art14 16 and 21 of the constitution of the India and consequently set a side the

proceedings of 3rd respondent in REC No A1/26/2021/Kurnool Dt

appointing the petitioners on compassionate grounds in the place of her deceased

sister and to pa

ss…”

3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 25156/2022

...PETITIONER

AND

The Sate Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

The Court made the following:

petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

o issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS

declare the proceedings of 3rd respondent in proceedings REC No A1/26/2021/Kurnool

Dt 25/07/2022 as illegal and contrary to the guidelines framed by the government and

violative Art14 16 and 21 of the constitution of the India and consequently set a side the

proceedings of 3rd respondent in REC No A1/26/2021/Kurnool Dt 25/07/2022 by

appointing the petitioners on compassionate grounds in the place of her deceased

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

[3310]

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

...PETITIONER

...RESPONDENT(S)

petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

o issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS

A1/26/2021/Kurnool

framed by the government and

violative Art14 16 and 21 of the constitution of the India and consequently set a side the

25/07/2022 by

appointing the petitioners on compassionate grounds in the place of her deceased

4

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that her sister by name Metal

Hepsiba was appointed as a Office Subordinate in Commercial Tax

Department, Kurnool by the Joint Collector, Kurnool, vide proceedings No

A/847/2010 Dt.11/09/2012. However, while discharging her duties, she died

on 31/08/2021 due to brain hemorrhage. The petitioner’s father by name

Devadhanam having two daughters and the petitioner herein is the younger

daughter and there is no male member in their family and her parents

expressed their willingness to appoint the petitioner in the place of her

deceased elder sister, accordingly, the petitioner submitted her application to

the respondents on 12/01/2022 dually requesting them to appoint her in the

place of her deceased elder sister except herself there is no other earning

member of her family. In the application, the petitioner categorically disclosed

that she is an unemployed married women and herself only person to take

care her old age parents who is suffering with medical problems. It is stated

that the Government of Andhra Pradesh time and again issued G.Os relating

to the appointments on compassionate grounds in the place of the deceased

employee. As per the G.O.Ms.No.687GAD(Ser.A)Department Dt.03/10/1997

Issued orders providing permanent rellef to the family of a deceased

government servant who dies in harness by appointing the family members to

the posts for which such dependents are eligible subjective certain condition

specified thereln.

It is stated that, earlier the Petitioner application was rejected by the

authorities in proceedings R.C.No.A1/26/2021 Dt.21/03/2022 by the 3rd

5

respondent on the ground that she is not a dependent family members

because she is a married women. Subsequently, the petitioner made another

application by clarifying the objection raised by the 3rd respondent on

06/06/2022 citing the Memo 1GAD(Ser.A) No.17897/SER-A/2000-Department

Dated 20/04/2000 issued by the Government. Even though the petitioner

submitted all relevant certificates i.e., Family Members Certificate issued by

the Tahsildar,Koilakuntla Mandal, Dated 27/04/2022, which clearly disclosed

that she is the family member of Metal Devadhanam, who is none-other than

her father, the respondents have not considered her case for compassionate

appointment. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. The counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents No.1 and 2.

While denying the allegations made in the petition, inter alia, stated that, the

representation ofthe petitioner was rejected not on the ground of condition that

she is the sister of the deceased Government Servant but due to the fact that

her husband is doing business and that her family is being supported by the

earnings derived out of the business. There is a clear distinction for rejection

of application not becoming the married sister and her husband involved in the

business and family is in possession of considerable earnings out of the sales

in the business. The turnovers scored in the business would disclose that the

family is receiving the sufficient earnings to run the family. In view of the

above fact, the petitioner's representation was rejected through this Office

endorsement dated: 06.06.2022.

6

It is further stated in that counter affidavit that the Government Orders in

G.O.Ms.No.687 GAD (Ser.A)Dept., dated 03.10.1997 and G.O.Ms.No.612

GAD (Ser.A) Dept., dated 30.10.1977 have not been excluded the earning

husband of the Petitioner who is already engaged in the business and

becoming the family member of the Petitioner and also receiving the

considerable earnings which could meet to run the family smoothly. It is

further stated in the counter that the representation of the petitioner was

rejected on theground of fact that her husband engaged in the business and

happens to be in a position of earning to meet the family requirements but not

rejected on the ground that she was married. It is stated that there is clear

distinction for the words 'dependent' and 'married women'. It is stated that for

the purpose of compassionate appointments, the married daughter is not

dependent to the family of her father/mother. It is however, stated that the

Government with a view to provide succour to the family has allowed the

married daughter, though not dependent to their family, has declared eligible

to claim compassionate appointment subject to satisfying other conditions i.e.,

a married daughter is dependent on her father/ mother if she is living with her

father/mother when her husband deserts her or disappears for years together

or dies. In all such cases the husband should not have left any property or

income to his wife and the married daughter is solely dependent on the

support provided by her father/mother and is an un-employee. In this

connection, in this case, is that family of the job seeker cannot be a earning

member and family not to receive any income from the side of her husband

7

vide Govt Memo No.406/10/A/Admn, 11/2004, Fin. (Admn.II) dated

20.03.2004. In view of the above, as there are no grounds in the present writ

petition, the same is liable to be dismissed.

4. Heard Sri J. Ravi Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the

respondents.

5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the

averments made in the petition, submits that, in similar circumstances, this

Hon’ble Court in case of Smt. H.Sita Ratnam V/s State of A...P.

1

held that

the object of compassionate appointments is a social security measure to

support the family of the deceased government servant who dies in harness.

The aim and object of the policy for compassionate appointment is to provide

financial support to the family of the deceased employee who left the

dependents in distress and penury. He submits that the concept of the

compassionate appointment intended alleviate the distress of the family and it

is for such purpose appointment are permissible and provided even in the

rules and regulations and any rigid approach or too technical objection may

defeat the very object of the scheme. He submits that, in the present case,

the petitioner herself and her elder sister-deceased employee are only

children of her parents and after demise of her elder sister, there is no earning

member in her family to look after her old parents. Therefore, learned counsel

for the petitioner requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

1

WP No.35294/2014 dated 19.3.2021

8

6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader while denying the

allegations made by the petitioner, argued that, the petitioner was first made

an application on 12.01.2022 enclosing a no earning member certificate and

family members’ certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Koilkuntla, wherein the

family members are father and mother of deceased Government Servant. It is

submitted that as her name not found place either in the family member

certificate or No Earning Member Certificate, her representation dated:

12.01.2022 not entertained informing that she is not the part of the family of

the deceased Government Servant. He further submits that, in the

representations dated 12.01.2022 and 14.03.2022 submitted by the petitioner,

she did not expressly stated that she was married and her husband engaged

in the business under the name and style of M/s Fashion In, Proddatur and

thereby concealed the fact in order to get the appointment under

compassionate grounds. Therefore, the said representation was rejected on

the ground that her husband engaged in the business and happens to be in a

position of earning to meet the family requirements but not rejected on the

ground that she was married.

7. Perused the material on record.

8. On a perusal of the material, it is observed that, the petitioner’s sister

while working as Office Subordinate in Commercial Tax Department, Kurnool,

died due to brain hemorrhage. Now the petitioner filed the present writ

petition to consider her representation for appointment on compassionate

grounds in place of her sister.

9

9.The object of compassionate appointment is a social security

measure to support the family of the deceased government servant, who

dies in harness. The aim and object of the policy for compassionate

appointment is to provide financial support to the family of the deceased

employee, who left the dependents in distress and penury. The core aim of

the object of providing compassionate appointment is to relief the family

from financial sufferings being faced for the sudden demise of the Bread

Winner of the family. The sufferings being faced by the dependents of the

deceased employee for sudden demise of the Bread Winner could be

solved for some extent by providing compassionate appointment to the one

of the dependents of the deceased employee to look after the family. While

the State Government and its instrumentalities implementing the scheme of

compassionate appointments to help the destitute families of the deceased

employees, but incorporating such clause in eligibility criteria

discriminatingthe daughters, who are being married is appears to be illegal

and unjust.

10. It is appropriate to extract the relevant paragraphs of

G.O.Ms.No.612, General Administration (Services-A) Department, dated

30.10.1991, Memo No.17897/Ser.A/2000- 1, General Administration

(Ser.A) Department, dated 20.04.2000 and Memo

No.406/10/A.I/Admn.II/2004, Finance (Admn.II) Department, dated

20.03.2004, for better adjudication of the matter.

10

(1) G.O.Ms.No.612, General Administration (Services-A) Department, dated 30.10.1991 at

para No.2 (i): The younger brother/sister of the deceased Government Servant who remained

unmarried can be considered for appointment under the scheme, provided there is no other

earning member in the family. The cases which came up for consideration earlier need not be

reopened.

(2) Memo No.17897/Ser.A/2000-1, General Administration (Ser.A) Department, dated

20.04.2000 at para No.4: It is hereby clarified that the words “remained unmarried” occurring

in para 2(1) of G.O. second cited are applicable to the deceased Government employee only

and therefore only in cases where the deceased Government employee happensto have

remained unmarried, then only the youngerbrother/sister of such deceased Government

employee can be considered for compassionate appointment provided there is no other

earning member in the family as per the orders issued at para 2 (1) of the G.O. second cited.

(3) Memo No.406/10/A.I/Admn.II/2004, Finance (Admn.II) Department, dated 20.03.2004 at

paras 1 and 2:

The attention of the Director of State Audit, A.P., Hyderabad is invited to the reference cited

and he is informed that a married daughter can be given Compassionate Appointment under

the following circumstances:

(i) There should be no younger or older unmarried dependents in the family and the spouse

shouldbe unwilling of ineligible for appointment.

(ii) The married daughter should be dependent on her father/mother who was a Government

Employee/ deceased Government Employee.

(iii) There is no objection to consider one of the married daughters if there are more than one

married daughters as long as the condition No.1 & 2 are fulfilled.

11. It is to be noted that, there is clear distinction for the words

'dependent' and 'married women'. For the purpose of compassionate

appointments, the married daughter is not dependent to the family of her

father/mother. However, the Government with a view to provide succour to

the family has allowed the married daughter, though not dependent to their

family, has declared eligible to claim compassionate appointment subject to

satisfying other conditions i.e., a married daughter is dependent on her

father/ mother if she is living with her father/mother when her husband

deserts her or disappears for years together or dies. In all such cases the

husband should not have left any property or income to his wife and the

married daughter is solely dependent on the support provided by her

father/mother and is an un-employee.

11

12. In a case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs State of Haryana

2

, wherein

the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the appointment in public services on

compassionate ground has been carved out as an exception, in the interests

of justice, to the general rule that the appointment in the public services

should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications and

merit and no other mode of appointment nor any other consideration is

permissible. A compassionate appointment is made out of pure humanitarian

consideration taking into consideration the fact that unless some source of

livelihood is provided, the family would not be able to make both ends meet

and the while object of granting such appointment is to enable the family to

tide over the sudden crisis.

13. In similar circumstances, this Court has also laid down that an

appointment on compassionate ground has to be given in accordance with the

relevant rules and guidelines that have been framed by the concerned

authority and no person can claim appointment on compassionate grounds in

disregard of such rule or such guidelines.

14. In the present, as the petitioner was married and her husband

engaged in the business and having sufficient means. Moreover, the parents

of the deceased employee are not dependants on their married daughter i.e.,

the petitioner herein. So, in view of the above circumstances, this Court is of

the view that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief of compassionate

appointment.

2

1994 AIR SCW 2305

12

15. Therefore, this Court found no merit in the instant writ petition and

devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

16. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order

as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall

stand closed.

_________________________

DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

Date : 28-03-2025

Gvl

13

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITON No.25156 of 2022

Date :28.03.2025

Gvl