Allowed

G.Saravanan v. The Govt. of Tamilnadu

Madras HC19 Feb 2015WP/19402/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction for compassionate appointment for the petitioner, son of a deceased Forest Guard. The High Court directed the Second Respondent to consider and dispose of the application, mandated by proceedings dated 18.4.2013, within three months.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the application for compassionate appointment within three months.

G.Saravanan Vs The Govt. of Tamilnadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :19.02.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.19402 of 2014 &

¶6

M.P.No. 1 of 2014

¶7

G.Saravanan .. Petitioner Vs. 1 The Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Forest, Chief Secretariat Fort St. George, Chennai. 2 The Principle Chief Conservator of Forest and Head of Forest Force Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015. . .. Respondents

¶8

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the application for appointment of the petitioner in the eligible post on compassionate ground as early as possible.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. G.Kumud Jhabakh

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.N.Inbanathan,

¶11

Govt. Advocate

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The father of the petitioner, by name, A.Ganesan, worked as Forest Guard. While he was employed at Nilgiris South Division, he died in harness on 17.5.2004. The deceased is survived by the petitioner, his mother and two younger brothers. The petitioner submitted an application for Compassionate Appointment. The application was not taken up for consideration by the respondents, resulting in filing this writ petition.

¶14

The documents available on record shows that the District Forest Officer by proceedings dated 06.3.2007 called https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ upon the petitioner to produce his educational certificate and

¶15

Financial certificate on 16.3.2005. According to the petitioner, he appeared before the District Forest Officer on 16.3.2005 and produced records. Subsequently, the District Forest Officer by proceedings dated 18.4.2013 informed the petitioner that his name has already been recommended to the second respondent for appointment on Compassionate Ground. Nothing was heard thereafter. The petitioner is therefore before this Court.

¶16

The second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the application submitted by the petitioner for Compassionate Appointment in the light of the proceedings dated 18.4.2013 on the file of the District Forest Officer Nilgiris. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

The writ petition is disposed of with the above
direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (Lok adalat)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
ga
To
1 The Secretary
Ministry of Forest, Chief Secretariat
Fort St. George, Chennai.
2 The Principle Chief Conservator of Forest and
Head of Forest Force
Panagal Maligai, Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
Writ Petition No.19402 of 2014 &
M.P.No. 1 of 2014

¶18

TEJ (CO) kk 4/3

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

G.Saravanan v. The Govt. of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Saravanan v. The Govt. of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Dhanalakshmi Vs The State of Tamilnadu

K.Lakshmanan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

P.Anandan, Vs The Commissioner

G.Padmanabhan Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative

T.Sathishkumar, Vs the District Collector

S.Raman Vs The Government of Tamilnadu