Allowed

R.Hariraj v. The Registrar General

Madras HC9 Oct 2023WP/29024/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the rejection of a compassionate appointment application. The petitioner's brother, employed in government service, was cited as a bar. This court directed the respondent to conduct a field enquiry regarding the brother's residence before deciding on merits. Petition allowed with directions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd Respondent to conduct a field enquiry regarding the petitioner's brother's residence and decide on merits within one month.

R.Hariraj Vs The Registrar General — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.10.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

W.P.No.29024 of 2023 and WMP.No.28609 of 2023

¶7

R.Hariraj Petitioner

¶8

..vs..

¶9

The Registrar General, High Court, Madras - 600 104. 2. The Principal District Judge, Salem District, Salem. .. Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ

¶11

of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent No.2 in relation to the proceedings issued in ENDT Roc.No.19809/A/2023 dated 26.04.2023 and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the Respondent No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner and to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds to any suitable post in the existing vacancies with all benefits.

¶12

1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Saseetharan

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.Kempraj Standing Counsel

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

(made by S.VAIDYANATHAN,J )

¶19

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent in ENDT Roc.No.19809/A/2023 dated 26.04.2023 and for a direction to the 2nd Respondent to consider the case of the petitioner and to appoint him on compassionate ground to any suitable post in the existing vacancies with all benefits.

¶20

The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner's father Raju died in harness on 23.09.2020, while he was working as driver in the Labour Court, Salem and since the Petitioner's elder brother who was employed as Office Assistant in Majila Court, Salem, got married and is living separately and not extending any financial support to the Petitioner's family, the Petitioner's mother made an application to the 2nd Respondent seeking appointment to the Petitioner on compassionate ground and the same came to be rejected by the 2nd Respondent on 26.04.2023 on the ground that the Petitioner's brother is in Government service. For the

¶21

2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶23

sake of ready reference, the said rejection order is extracted hereunder:

¶24

"jpU/M.uh$h (,wg;g[) Xl;Leh;. bjhHpyhsh; ePjpkd;wk;. nryk; gzpapy; cs;s nghJ 23/09/2020 md;W ,we;Jtpl;lhu;/ mtupd; 2tJ kfd; jpU/R.~upuh$.; fUiz mog;gilapy; thupR ntiy ntz;o kD bra;jpUe;jhu;/ jw;nghJ jpU/jpU/M.uh$h (,wg;g[) Xl;Leh;. bjhHpyhsh; ePjpkd;wk;. nryk; mtupd; K:j;j kfd; jpU/ehfuh$;. nryk; K:d;whtJ TLjy; khtl;l ePjpkd;wj;jpy; mYtyf cjtpahsuhf gzpg[upe;J tUtjhy; ,we;j muR CHpaupd; FLk;g cWg;gpdu; Vw;fdnt muR gzpapy; cs;sjhy; muR Miz vz;/18. ehs; 23/01/2020 go jpU/ ~upuh$; Mfpa ePu; fUiz mog;gilapy; ntiy ntz;o mDg;gpa ckJ mk;kD jpUg;gg;gLfpwJ/"

¶25

He further submitted that as the petitioner's elder brother is residing separately

¶26

and not extending any financial support to the Petitioner's family, the case of the Petitioner comes under clause 4(iv) of G.O.Ms.No.18, Labour & Employment Department dated 23.01.2020 and therefore, his case ought to have been considered by the second respondent for compassionate appointment.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that the family members of the petitioner along with the Petitioner's brother are residing in the same address i.e., in the address given in the application made on compassionate ground.

¶28

Heard both sides and perused the records.

¶29

When this Court posed a question to the learned Standing Counsel as to

¶30

whether field enquiry has been conducted by the 2nd Respondent/Principal District

¶31

3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶33

Judge to ascertain whether the petitioner's brother is living separately with his family, as contended by the petitioner, it was submitted that no such details are available. A reading of the order impugned also shows that no field enquiry was conducted and the order impugned is interfered with on that score only.

¶34

Hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we direct the 2nd Respondent to conduct field enquiry as per the Official Memorandam issued by the Registry of this Court in R.O.C.No.30823-F/2020/C4 dated 01.08.2022 and 03.08.2022, as per the order dated 18.03.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.24710 of 2018 as to whether the Petitioner's brother is residing separately or along with his family members and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner's brother Nagaraj, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

This Writ Petition stands allowed with the directions supra. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶36

[S.V.N., J.,] [K.R.S., J] 09.10.2023

¶37

Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No arr

¶38

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶40

¶41

The Registrar General, High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶42

The Principal District Judge, Salem District, Salem.

¶43

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶45

S. VAIDYANATHAN,J., and K.RAJASEKAR,J

¶46

arr

¶47

W.P.No.29024 of 2023

¶48

09.10.2023

¶49

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

R.Hariraj v. The Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Hariraj v. The Registrar General

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

M/s.Catalunya City Barcelona Owner Welfare Asso Vs Anithu Vivasaaya Sagupadi Pairkal Urpatthy Vivasayigal Sangam

S.Saraswathi, Vs a.R.Gopi,hereditary Trustee

M/s. Anithu Vivasaaya Sagupadi Pairkal Urpatthy Vivasayigal Sangam Vs a.R.Rahul Nadh IAS

S.Perumal Vs The Deputy Inspector General Registration

The Management Vs the Principal Labour Court

The Management of Prince Pipes Vs G. Elangovan