Administrative decisions must include reasons to uphold fairness and justice, particularly in compassionate appointment cases to assist dependents of deceased government employees.

JUDGMENT :

SUREPALLI NANDA, J.

Heard Sri C.Hari Preeth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services(Home) appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Memo No.634- P/Ser.II/A2/2019-2, dt. 06.05.2022 issued by the 1^st respondent rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds intimating the same through the 3^rd respondent in its Memorandum File No.A1-COMP.APPT/172/2022, dt. 09.05.2023 without assigning any reasons as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently by setting aside the Impugned Memo No.634-P/Ser.II/A2/2019-2, dt. 06.05.2022 and the intimation Memo issued by the 3^rd respondent vide File No.A1- COMP.APPT/172/2022, dt. 09.05.2023, direct the respondents to forthwith consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment in any suitable post on compassionate grounds on par with the similar candidates who were considered and appointed by the 1^st respondent vide Memo No.334- P/Ser.II/A2/2017, dt. 17.06.2017 and under G.O.Rt.No.411, dt. 07.11.2014 in the interest of Justice and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the father of the petitioner, who was working as a Police Constable, died on 08.05.2014 due to ill health while in service. The petitioner, being a divorced and unemployed daughter, submitted an application dated 13.02.2019 for compassionate appointment to the respondents. Respondent No.2 recommended her case to Respondent No.1 on 07.11.2020. However, despite making several representations, Respondent No.1 rejected her request through the impugned Memo No. 634-P/Ser.II/A2/2019-2, dated 06.05.2022, without assigning any reasons and the same had been intimated to the petitioner by the respondent No.3 herein vide its Memorandum File No.A1- COMP.APPT/172/2022, dated 09.05.2023. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

PERUSED THE RECORD

A) The relevant portion of the impugned proceedings vide Memo No.634-P/Ser.I I/A2/2019-2, dated 06.05.2022 issued by the respondent No.1-Principal Secretary to Government to the respondent No.2-The Director General of Police, Telangana State, is extracted hereunder

“The attention of the Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad, is Invited to the references cited. He is informed that the request of Smt. N.B. Sunitha, divorced daughter of late Ramaswamy, ARPC 30, Warangal for providing appointment to her under compassionate grounds is not feasible for consideration as per the existing rules.

2. The Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad, is requested to intimate the same to the individual under due acknowledgement.”

B) The relevant portion of the memorandum of the respondent No.3-The Commissioner of Police, Warangal, vide File No.A1-COMP.APPT/172/2022 dated 09.05.2023 issued to the petitioner herein is extracted hereunder

“In pursuance of the Govt orders issued vide reference 5^th cited, the request of Smt N.B.Sunitha, divorced daughter of ate Ramaswamy, ARPC 30, Warangal for providing appointment to her under compassionate grounds is not feasible for consideration as per the existing rules.”

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits tha