ORDER
1. The petitioner’s husband was allegedly murdered by extremists on 5-12-1995. A criminal case is registered in respect of the same by the police of Kadam and the said case is pending for trial. The Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued a G.O. on 8-11-1996 giving certain succour to the dependants of the victims who have been liquidated by the extremists in the State. Under the said G.O. the Government has decided to provide employment to the son or daughter or spouse of any person killed in the extremists violence or in police firing. The G.O. directs all the Collectors to issue orders in respect of any Department where there is a vacancy for appointment of such dependant of the victim at the level of Junior Assistant/Typist depending upon the qualifications of the applicant. The Collectors are further authorised to relax age, on case to case basis for such appointment. Clause (4) of the G.O. says “the above order will come into effect from 20-2-1996”. Petitioner made representation for consideration of her case for appointment under the said G.O. The 2nd respondent passed the impugned order on 19-12-1998 rejecting the claim solely on the ground that the husband of the petitioner was murdered by the extremists on 5-12-1995 which was much before the issuance of the G.O. on this ground, the application was rejected.
2. The Government Order nowhere refers to any cut-off date for granting relief to the persons murdered by extremists. What the G.O. says is that it shall come into effect from 26-2-1996, meaning thereby that nobody was entitled to employment before 26-2-1996 on the ground of murder by any extremists. However, all dependents of such murdered persons as mentioned in G.O. would be entitled for such consideration on and from 26-2-1996 onwards, irrespective of the date of murder. The 2nd respondent has read something which is not in the G.O. to deprive the petitioner of her right to be considered for employment under the G.O. It is made clear that the petitioner will be entitled to be considered from 26-2-1996 onwards for an appropriate appointment subject of course to the qualifications prescribed. The Government has also given power to Collectors to relax the age consideration on case to case basic.
3. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 19-12-1998 is unsustainable and is quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the petitioner’s case in the light of the observations made above and pass appropriate orders within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.