ORDER :

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

“…to declare the action of the respondents in issued the impugned Proceedings Rc.No.74616/2017-A9, dated 05.10.2017 wherein rejected the petitioners case for compassionate appointment under G.O.Ms.No.118, Finance and Planning Fin Wing PC.III Department, dated 18.08.1999 as highly illegal, arbitrary and consequentially this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to consider the applicant case for compassionate appointment in any suitable post under G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance and Planning (Fin Wing P C.III) Department, dated 18.08.1999 by set aside the impugned proceedings dated 05.10.2017 and pass such other order or orders…….”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner’s father P. Nageswara Rao belongs to SC category and appointed as NMR (Sweeper) at Dowleswaram Gram Panchayat vide proceedings No.6850/85/A3, dated 1.4.1985 by the 2nd respondent. Later, the 1st respondent had issued proceedings in L.Dis.No.13373/91-A3, dated 31.12.1991 stating that the petitioner’s father and others eligible NMRs were converted into Last Grade Service and granted the time scale of Rs.740-15-950-20-1150 keeping in view their length of his service and eligibility. But, later, the 1st respondent had cancelled the conversion orders vide proceedings No.5693/91/A2, dated 6.2.1993 on certain allegations. Against the same, the petitioner’s father had preferred OA No.768/1993 on the file of Hon’ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal and the same was allowed by the Tribunal setting aside the impugned order dated 6.2.1993 and directed to continue the petitioner in the time scales with a liberty to complete the enquiry on the allegations. While pending regularization of the petitioner’s father services, unfortunately he died on 3.5.2016 as NMR. Subsequently, the petitioner herein had submitted representation to the respondents requested to appoint him on compassionate grounds in any suitable post as per G.O.Ms.No.118 F&P Department, dated 18.8.1999 in the light of G.O.Ms.No.212.

As the respondents have not taken any action, the petitioner has approached the Tribunal by way of filing O.A No.2144 of 2017 seeking to consider his case in the existing vacancies and the same was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 1.9.2017 directed the respondents No.1 and 2 to consider the petitioner representation dated 22.11.2016 and 14.12.2016 as per GOMs.No.118 Finance and Planning (Fin.Wing.P.C.III) Department dated 18.08.1999 within a period of three months. But the claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the 2nd respondent and issued the present impugned proceedings dated 5.10.2017. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent denied all the allegations made in the petition and contended that the petitioner has filed OA No.2144/2017 and the Tribunal has directed to consider the representations in terms of G.O.Ms.No.118 dated 18.8.1999 and in obedience of the same, speaking orders were issued to the petitioner through Roc.No.74616/2017-A9 Pts., dated 00.10.2017 by considering the representations submitted by the petitioner dated 22.11.2016 and 14.12.2016 and rejected the request of the petitioner since his father is not eligible for regularization of services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212. Hence, the orders of the Tribunal were complied with and issued speaking orders. It is further stated that the petitioner has filed CA No.447/2017 in OA No.2144/2017 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal and the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 27.12.2017. it is further stated that as per the speaking orders issued by the respondents, the father of the petitioner is not eligible for regularization of services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 and the petitioner is also not eligible for compassionate appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.118 dated 18.8.1999. Hence, he is not entitled to c