JUDGMENT :

V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.

1. This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed aggrieved against the judgment and decree, dated 12.09.2011, in A.S.No.22 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, reversing the judgment and decree, dated 31.01.2008, in O.S.No.940 of 2005, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur.

2. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.940 of 2005, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur, with a prayer for declaration that the plaintiff is the adopted son of Rayudu Veerraju and his wife Somamma and for costs of the suit.

3. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur, dismissed the suit without costs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful plaintiff in the above said suit filed the first appeal before the First Appellate Court. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, allowed the appeal without costs by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Judge. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants/defendant Nos.1 to 3 approached this Court by way of second appeal.

4. The appellants herein are the defendant Nos.1 to 3, the respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff and the respondent No.2 herein is the defendant No.4 in O.S.No.940 of 2005.

5. For the sake of convenience, both parties in the second appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the suit O.S.No.940 of 2005.

6. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in O.S.No.940 of 2005, is as follows:

One Rayudu Veerraju and his wife Somamma adopted the plaintiff as they had no children and they requested Rayudu Surya Rao, who is the younger brother of Rayudu Veerraju to give the plaintiff, who is his son, in adoption to them. The plaintiff pleaded that the natural parents of the plaintiff agreed to the same and accordingly, on 10.03.1985, a function was arranged and all the relatives of late Rayudu Veerraju and his wife Somamma attended the function and since then, the plaintiff joined the family of late Rayudu Veerraju as an adopted son by acquiring all rights as a son of Rayudu Veerraju and continued his studies and began living in their house. The plaintiff further pleaded that Rayudu Veerraju was working as a gangman in the defendant Nos.1 to 3 department i.e. the South Central Railways and he died on 06.09.1995 while he was on duty. The plaintiff pleaded that one Venkamma, who is the original wife of Rayudu Veerraju, filed a suit in O.S.No.18 of 1998 seeking declaration to that effect and also for the death benefits of late Rayudu Veerraju and subsequently, the said Venkamma, the plaintiff and his mother Somamma compromised the matter before Lok Adalat, Kovvur, on 05.05.2001, to avoid delay in receiving the death benefits and the job for the plaintiff on compassionate grounds from the defendant Nos.1 to 3 department.

The plaintiff pleaded that accordingly, the pension was granted to the plaintiff‟s mother Somamma as per the Lok Adalat award and the defendant Nos.1 to 3 paid the death benefits and half share in the arrears of pension to the said Venkamma and also to the plaintiff‟s mother Somamma respectively. The plaintiff further pleaded that he applied to the defendant Nos.1 to 3 for a job on compassionate grounds and the defendant Nos.1 to 3 sent an application form to the plaintiff, which was filled by him and submitted to the defendant Nos.1 to 3, but the defendant Nos.1 to 3 failed to take any action on the application of the plaintiff and as such, the plaintiff got issued a legal notice to the defendant Nos.2 and 3 requesting them to consider and implement the Lok Adalat decree dated 05.05.2001, by providing the job to the plaintiff on compassionate grounds, but, though the defendant Nos.2 and 3 received the same, they kept quiet without giving any reply. Aggrieved by the said action, the plaintiff filed O.A.No.1656 of 2003, before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, seeking a direction to