This order dismissed a writ petition seeking a mandatory order for compassionate appointment of the petitioner's son. The Court held that the death occurred in 1998, making the application late by over 19 years. It found the case hit by laches and noted the proposal had already been rejected previously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.01.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P.(MD) No.336 of 2018
R.Maheswari .. Petitioner
Vs.
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to consider the proposal of the third respondent in Proceedings No.E.355/07, dated 16.10.2008 for compassionate appointment of petitioner's son R.Ramkumar, S/o.late P.Rajasekaran, deceased employee as per rule of seniority and in accordance with scheme of compassionate appointment.
For petitioner : Mr.K.Appadurai For respondents : Mr.K.Saravanan
Government Advocate
O R D E R
Heard the learned Counsel on either side
2
addressed to the third respondent, rejecting the said proposal on the ground that the application seeking grant of appointment on the compassionate ground was not received within three years. A copy of the said communication was also marked to the writ petitioner herein.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-I)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
KMI
TE/JC/SAR-4 : 06/03/2018 : 2P/6C ORDER MADE IN https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
W.P(MD).No.336 of 2018
24.01.2018
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued to direct the authority to consider a belated compassionate appointment proposal filed 19 years after the employee's death.
Whether the petitioner's case was barred by laches given the excessive delay in approaching the court.
Whether the proposal dated 16.10.2008 had already been considered and rejected by the department.
R.Maheswari
Commissioner of Agriculture
Joint Director of Agriculture
Assistant Director of Agriculture
G.R.Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
