Disposed

D.Karpagam v. The District Collector

Madras HC7 Aug 2023WP/16553/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for compassionate appointment, the court addressed the respondent's requirement for a No Objection Certificate from the petitioner's mother-in-law. Dismissing the challenge, the court directed the petitioner to file an undertaking affidavit maintaining her mother-in-law within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file an undertaking affidavit regarding maintenance of her mother-in-law within one month before the respondents.

D.Karpagam Vs The District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.08.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

W.P.No.16553 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.15837 of 2022

D.Karpagam

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶11

2.The Commissioner, Chengam Panchayat Union, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Chengam Panchayat Union, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.VaA4/0019/2022, dated 30.03.2022, and quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds in the 2^nd respondent Panchayat Union or any Government Department.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam For R1 : Mr.P.Baladhandayutham Special Government Pleader For R2 and R3 : No appearance

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the 2^nd respondent, dated 30.03.2022, directing the petitioner to furnish the “No Objection Certificate” from her mother-in-law for the purpose of processing her request for compassionate appointment.

¶21

2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's husband died

¶22

in harness on 14.05.2021 due to Covid-19 attack. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted her application for compassionate appointment and for Covid-19 incentive. While so, now, the 2^nd respondent has passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to produce the “No Objection Certificate” obtained from her mother-in-law in order to process the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment, challenging which, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶26

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶27

4.Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, learned Special Government

¶28

Pleader, appearing for the 1^st respondent, submitted that a person seeking compassionate appointment should give an undertaking that he/she will take care of the other legal heirs of the deceased employee, including elderly family members, as per G.O.(Ms) No.18, Labour and Employment (Q1) Department, dated 23.01.2020, however, such an undertaking is not given by the petitioner and therefore, in order to avoid any future conflicts from the side of mother of the deceased employee, the impugned order has been passed. The learned Special Government Pleader further submitted that the Covid-19 Incentive of Rs.12.5 Lakhs each has been paid to the petitioner as well the mother of the deceased. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court.

¶29

5.In view of the submissions made by the learned Special Government Pleader and also considering the fact that the application for compassionate appointment has been filed in time, the petitioner may give an undertaking affidavit before the authorities that she will maintain her

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Page 3 of 5

¶32

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶33

mother-in-law, as required under G.O.(Ms) No.18, Labour and Employment (Q1) Department, dated 23.01.2020, within a period of one month. On such undertaking being given by the petitioner, the respondents may consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment and may appoint her in a suitable post.

¶34

6.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶35

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶36

07.08.2023 (2/2)

¶37

mkn

¶38

Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral citation : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order

¶39

¶40

1.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

¶41

2.The Commissioner, Chengam Panchayat Union, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.

¶42

3.The Block Development Officer, Chengam Panchayat Union, Chengam, Thiruvannamalai District.

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

Page 4 of 5

¶45

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶46

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J. mkn

¶47

W.P.No.16553 of 2022

¶48

07.08.2023 (2/2)

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶50

Page 5 of 5

D.Karpagam v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Karpagam v. The District Collector

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

J.George Christopher Jesu Vs Teachers Recruitment Board

S.Govindaraj Vs the Managing Director

S.Sivakumar Vs the District Collector

J.Ramesh Babu Vs TamilNadu Generation and Distribution

J.v.Madhan raj Vs Chief Educational officer

E.Seshathiri (Regn.No.0101025030) Vs The State of TamilNadu