Writ petition sought quashing of rejection of the petitioner's request for compassionate appointment by Chennai Port Trust. The court found the petitioner and his family had accepted compensation and executed an indemnity bond forgoing such appointment; the petition was misconceived and was dismissed.
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.No.31270 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.07.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.No.31270 of 2014 and
M.P.No.1 of 2014
E.Kamalraj ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Secretary, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent herein in his impugned proceeding No.SCT5/6399/2006/GA dated 12.11.2010 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground in Class IV service.
Page 1 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakaran
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
For respondents : Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan
*****
O RDER
The above writ petition is filed challenging the order dated
12.11.2010 passed by the second respondent, in and by which, the second respondent had rejected the petitioner's request for compassionate appointment.
2. The petitioner's father was a Mazdoor in the Traffic
Department with the Chennai Port Trust. From 03.10.1990, he had gone missing and despite their best efforts, they were unable to trace
him. Since the petitioner's father was the sole breadwinner, his disappearance had put the entire family into financial stress. Therefore, the petitioner, being the eldest son, who was aged about 10 years when his father had gone missing, immediately after attaining the age of majority, made a representation to the first respondent seeking compassionate appointment. The petitioner was
Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
placed in the waiting list and assigned D.R.No.2449.
Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
Page 4 of 7
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
bond has been signed by the petitioner, his mother viz., Uma and his brother viz., Saravanan. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner and his family members had received the money in lieu of compassionate appointment and the petitioner has also given an Indemnity Bond declaring that he and his family members will not claim compassionate appointment in future in the respondents' Port Trust. Having executed this bond, nearly after 12 years, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for compassionate appointment.
indemnity bond, the present writ petition is totally misconceived and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected M.P. stands closed. No costs.
02.07.2024
Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order ssa
To
Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
P.T.ASHA, J.,
ssa
W.P.No.31270 of 2014
02.07.2024
Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, having received compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment and executed an indemnity bond, could still seek compassionate appointment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
E.Kamalraj
The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust
The Secretary, Chennai Port Trust
P.T.Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
