Dismissed¶34

M.Kannan v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC20 Jun 2025WP/21774/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

compassionate grounds appointment; back wages; service benefits; delay in granting appointment; salary from date of application; Article 226 writ petition; certiorarified mandamus; Department of Agriculture Tamil Nadu; Assistant Director of Agriculture Salem; letter No.A3/2222/2020 dated 11.12.2024; writ petition dismissed; Madras High Court; W.P.No.21774 of 2025; W.M.P.No.24713 of 2025; C. Kumarappan J.; 2025

What did the court decide?

Mere submission of an application for compassionate grounds appointment does not enure any benefit to the applicant. ¶30

M.Kannan Vs the Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.21774 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

W.P.No.21774 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.No.24713 of 2025

M.Kannan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Secretary to Government, Department of Agriculture, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

The Secretary to Government, Department of Labour and Employment, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶13

The Deputy Director of Agriculture, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶14

The Assistant Director of Agriculture, Salem District. ... Respondents

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned letter No.A3/2222/2020, dated 11.12.2024, rejecting his claim for back

¶16

1/5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.21774 of 2025

¶19

wages and service benefits from January 2014 to February 2021 and consequently, direct the respondents to pay the said dues with all attendant service benefits.

¶20

For Petitioner : M/s.Nathan and Associates For Respondents : Mr.G.Nanmaran, Special Government Pleader

¶21

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.12.2024 passed by the fourth respondent.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has applied for compassionate grounds appointment during January 2014. However, the appointment was given to the petitioner during February 2021 and he received salary since then. Subsequently, he has sent a representation claiming salary from the date of his application for compassionate grounds qua from January 2014.

¶25

2/5

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.21774 of 2025

¶28

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the appointment was given only February 2021, and that since then he has been paid salary. As such, his claim for salary from the date of his compassionate grounds application is unreasonable and illegal.

¶29

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made on either side.

¶30

As rightly contended by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that mere submission of the application for compassionate grounds will not enure any benefit to the petitioner. Apart from that the compassionate appointment itself is a benefit given to the petitioner as it is exceptional to the regular public employment. In such view of the matter, the claim of the petitioner is absolutely unreasonable and illegal. Hence, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order.

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.No.21774 of 2025

¶34