Point of law: undisputedly the petitioner is the elder daughter of the deceased and she along with her husband is staying at the place of the deceased even after her marriage. In the society, there are two types of families – one is wealthy and the other is poor. The wealthy people ask their daughters after marriage either to stay with them or to stay separately by making necessary arrangements. In the second category, the daughters continue to stay with their parents depending upon their income even after their marriage when they do not have source of income. The present case is of the second category.

ORDER :

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari call for the records pertaining to the impugned Lr.No.Dy Sup/785 (1998/14)/14/RM-VZM – NECR: VZM, dated 13.03.2014, and quash the same as it is void, illegal and it is contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.350, dated 30.07.1999 and consequently direct the respondents to appoint petitioner in any suitable post compassionately on the death of petitioner’s father, who died in harness and his staff No. is 453459 by declaring the action of the respondents as it is arbitrary, illegal, unjust and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Heard Sri Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Srihari, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC appearing for the respondents and perused the record.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner, who worked as Driver in respondent Corporation, died in harness on 11.03.2009. The 3rd respondent has issued a certificate stating that the father of the petitioner has not availed any additional monetary benefits in lieu of employment. Consequent to the sudden demise of the sole bread winner of the family, the wife of the petitioner viz., Smt. Chinnammudu submitted an application seeking to provide employment on compassionate grounds. It was rejected by the respondents informing her, her request could not be considered since she was not having required qualification for the post of Conductor or Shramik.

4. Subsequently, the petitioner, daughter of the deceased employee has submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds in any suitable post. The respondents informed the petitioner that there is a ban on the recruitment under compassionate grounds at that time. The State Government lifted the ban vide G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2013 and accorded permission to the respondents to take up appointments on compassionate grounds with retrospective effect. The mother of the petitioner also gave “no objection” to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds. Against the inaction of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner, the petitioner filed W.P.No.1998 of 2014 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by its order, dated 28.01.2014 directing the respondent Nos.2 therein to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds provided her name is in the list of 1120 identified cases and take an appropriate decision in the matter. Subsequently, the respondent No.2 issued proceedings in letter No.Dy Sup/785(1998/14)/14/RM-VZM, dated 13-03-2014 on the ground that the petitioner is ineligible for consideration on compassionate grounds as she got married and she is not dependent on the deceased father.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and her mother are the dependents on the deceased employee. The husband of the petitioner is also an unemployee and is a daily wager. Learned counsel submits that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.350, dated 30.07.1999, the married daughters also entitled for consideration of appointment on compassionate grounds. This Court also held that married daughter is entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds. Under these circumstances, rejection of the claim of the petitioner on the ground that she is a married daughter is illegal, unjust and contrary to the object of scheme of compassionate appointment and sought to allow the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.

6. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that consequent to the death of the father of the petitioner, who was working as Driver in Srikaku