The Court dismissed the writ petition filed for compassionate appointment. The petitioner's application was filed 15 years after the employee's death in 1996. The Court held that the rejection was in consonance with legal principles as the scheme is a concession, not a right, and such long delay defeats its object.
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.
W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013
A.Satheesh Kumar
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
2.The Superintending Engineer, Ramanathapuram Electricity Distribution Circle, Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Assistant Engineer, (Rural), O/o Assistant Engineer, Tamilnadu Electricity Board, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorified Mandamus to call for the entire records, relating to the impugned orders passed by the third respondent vide his proceedings in letter No.004974/Uu Ni A/Nib 2/u2/Ko.Va.Ve/11, dated 05.07.2011 and consequential letter No.11510-1/Uu Ni A/Nibi 2/U2/Ko.Va.Ve/13, dated 10.07.2013 and quash the same as arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in any one of the available post in the respondents' office as suitable for the qualification of the petitioner within a time that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
For Respondents : Mr. T.Sakthikumaran Standing Counsel
ORDER
The order of rejection rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment is under challenge in the present writ petition. The reasons stipulated in the impugned order of rejection dated 05.07.2011 is that the deceased employee https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the Board died on 31.05.1996. As per the terms and conditions
1/3
W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013
of the scheme of compassionate appointment, the application must be submitted between the period of three years from the date of the death of the deceased employee. However, in the present case, the petitioner had submitted the application on 11.05.2011 after a lapse of about 15 years from the date of the death of the deceased employee.
2/3
W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013
The first application submitted by the brother of the writ petitioner was also dismissed. There is no rule to submit the application by all the legal heirs one by one. Once an application is filed on behalf of the family of the deceased employee, then there is no scope for further application by the other legal heir. Indigence and other family circumstances are to be considered before granting any appointment under compassionate ground. Then all these aspects are to be considered for granting compassionate appointment.
Assistant Registrar ()
// True Copy //
/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
SSL
W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013 16.10.2020
SSS(CO) KM (05.11.2020) 3P 1C
3/3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment considering the delay of 15 years since the death of the deceased employee.
Whether the scheme of compassionate appointment can be invoked after such a long lapse of time.
Whether the rejection order of the third respondent is legally tenable.
A.Satheesh Kumar
Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
Superintending Engineer, Ramanathapuram Electricity Distribution Circle
Assistant Engineer (Rural)
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
