ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by respondent No.4 vide Memo No.CGM(HRD)/GM(Per)/AS(Per& SER)/PO-H/110-H1/2018, dt.24.08.2018 that the petitioners case cannot be considered for providing employment under compassionate grounds unless it is established by cogent evidence that he was born through the first wife and further observation of the 4th respondent that the children of second wife do not get the status of legitimate children as being illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and against the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, and against the rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in any eligible post on compassionate grounds and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Thereafter, I.A.No.1 of 2020 was filed seeking to amend the prayer and the same was amended vide order dated 04.11.2020, which reads as under:

“ to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 3rd respondent vide Memo No CGM(HRD)/GM(PER)/AS(Per&SER)/ PO-H/110-H1/2018, dated 24/08/2018 that the petitioner’s case cannot be considered for providing employment under compassionate grounds unless it is established by cogent evidence that he was born through the first wife as well as the observation that the children of the second wife do not get the status of legitimate children as being illegal, arbitrary highhanded and against the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and further declare Sub Rule (1) of Rule 25 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 as well as Point 4 (xxi) of the APSEB Conduct Regulations as ultra vires and against the rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and being contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. V.R Tripathi reported in 2019 (14) SCC 646 and consequentially direct respondent Nos.2 to 4 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in any eligible post on compassionate grounds”

3. Heard Sri V.Murali Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that his father was employed as Lineman and he was born out of the second marriage of his father and his father expired while in service on 27.07.2016. Thereafter, he submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds on 17.07.2018, but the respondents have rejected his case vide proceedings dated 24.08.2018 stating that he is an illegitimate child and he was born out of second marriage and his father was not obtained prior permission from the 1st wife for getting married her mother. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that though the father of the petitioner might not have obtained prior permission from the 1st wife before marrying the mother of the petitioner as second wife, but the children born out of second wife have to be treated as legal and legitimate children and cannot be treated as illegitimate children and the order passed by the respondents is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Union of India vs. V.R.Tripathi, 2019 (14) SCC 646. Learned Counsel further contended that the Apex Court has elaborately considered the entire case law and held as under:

12. In V. Sivamurthy v. State of A.P., this Court summarised the principles relating to compassionate appointment as follows: (SCC pp. 741-42, para 18)

“18. … (a) Compassionate appointment based only on descent is impermissible. Appointments in public service should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applicat