Madras High Court
B. Selvamurugan vs The District Collector on 25 August, 2021
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
B. Selvamurugan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Block Development Officer,
Vembakkottai Panchayat Union Office,
Vembakkotai,
Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the impugned order in Na.Ka.A1/1919/2018, dated
14.11.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and to quash the same as
illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to appoint the
petitioner in any suitable post under compassionate appointment in 2 nd
respondent's Office.
For Petitioner : M/S.M.Thirynavukkarasu
For Respondents : Mr.A.K. Manickam
Counsel for state
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/7
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order in
Na.Ka.A1/1919/2018, dated 14.11.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein
and to quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent
herein to appoint the petitioner in any suitable post under compassionate
appointment in 2nd respondent's Office
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final
disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. According to the petitioner, his father, Late N.Balasubramanian, while
working as Junior Assistant in the Office of the 2nd respondent, died in harness
on 15.11.2006 leaving behind his mother, wife and son, the petitioner herein.
At that time, since the petitioner was a minor, his mother made an application
for compassionate appointment, but she was not conferred with the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
compassionate appointment. While so, on attaining the majority and after
obtaining a bachelor Degree in B.Sc., an application was made in the year 2016
to the 2nd respondent, seeking compassionate appointment in favour of the
petitioner. However, by proceedings dated 14.11.2018, the 2nd respondent
rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it was not made within
the prescribed time limit of 3 years. Hence, the Writ Petition.
5. Admittedly, when his father died on 15.11.2006, the petitioner was a
minor and was not eligible for appointment. After a period of nearly 10 years,
the petitioner claims appointment on compassionate grounds. It is beyond the
prescribed time limit of 3 years. In this regard, it is worthwhile to refer a
decision of this Court in “A.Venkatesan versus The Chairman, TNEB, Chennai
and another” in W.P.No.33500 of 2014, dated 11.10.2018, wherein, it has been
observed as under:
“4. This Court is of an opinion that the compassionate
appointment is a special scheme and the scheme of
compassionate appointment was introduced to mitigate the
penurious circumstances arising on account of the sudden death
of the Government employee. Thus, the scheme of
compassionate appointment must be extended to the legal heirs
of the deceased employee to protect their livelihood,
immediately after the death of the deceased employee. Thus,
the appointment to be granted on compassionate grounds
within a reasonable period of three years or atleast within a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
period of five years. Beyond that, legal presumption would
be that the penurious circumstances arising on account of
the sudden death of the Government employee became
vanished. It is not as if the compassionate appointment can
be claimed as a matter of right to provide one appointment
to one family of the deceased Government employee. Such a
scheme can never be accepted, in view of the fact that the
scheme of appointment itself, is in violation of Article 14 and
16 of the Constitution of India. The scheme being a special one
was introduced in violation of the constitutional principles.
Therefore, the same must be implemented strictly in accordance
with the terms and conditions. ....”
6. In fact, there cannot be reservation of a vacancy till such time as the
petitioner becomes a major after a number of years, unless there is some
specific provisions. The very basis of compassionate appointment is to see that
the family gets immediate relief. In this regard, it is worthwhile to refer to a
decision reported in "State of Manipur vs. Md. Rajaodin" {(2003) 7 SCC
511}, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in paragraph 11 of its judgment,
held as under:-
“In Smt. Sushma Gosain and others vs. Union of India and
others (1989 (4) SCC 468) it was observed that in all claims of
appointments on compassionate grounds, there should not be any
delay in appointment. The purpose of providing appointment on
compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of
the bread-earner in the family. Such appointments should,
therefore, be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress.
The fact that the ward was a minor at the time of death of his father
is no ground, unless the scheme itself envisage specifically
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
otherwise, to state that as and when such minor becomes a major he
can be appointed without any time consciousness or limit. The
above view was re-iterated in Phoolwati (Smt.) vs. Union of India
and others (1991) Supp. (2) SCC 689) and Union of India and
others vs. Bhagwan Singh (1995 (6) SCC 476). In Director of
Education (Secondary) and Anr. vs. Pushpendra Kumar and others
(1998 (5) SCC 192) it was observed that in matter of
compassionate appointment there cannot be insistence for a
particular post. Out of purely humanitarian consideration and
having regard to the fact that unless some source of livelihood is
provided the family would not be able to make both ends, meet,
provisions are made for giving appointment to one of the
dependents of the deceased who may be eligible for appointment.
Care has, however, to be taken that provision for ground of
compassionate employment which is in the nature of an exception
to the general provisions does not unduly interfere with the right of
those other persons who are eligible for appointment to seek
appointment against the post which would have been available, but
for the provision enabling appointment being made on
compassionate grounds of the dependent of the deceased employee.
As it is in the nature of exception to the general provisions it cannot
substitute the provision to which it is an exception and there nullity
the main provision by taking away completely the right conferred
by the main provision.”
7. Therefore, the scheme of providing compassionate appointment can be
extended only to eligible member of the family and not to an ineligible person.
Scheme has not been framed to provide employment assistance as and when the
son or daughter of the deceased employee attains majority. Under the scheme,
the department is not obligated to keep any post vacant, till the applicant attains
majority or to consider his candidature on attaining majority. Scheme only
enables those who are eligible and satisfy all the eligibility criteria including
age, within three years from the date of death.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
8.In the light of the above decisions supra, no relief can be granted, as
there is no illegality in the impugned order of the second respondent in
Na.Ka.No.A1/1919/2018 dated 14.11.2018. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is
dismissed. No costs.
25.08.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
dn
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
To:
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Block Development Officer,
Vembakkottai Panchayat Union Office,
Vembakkotai,
Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
dn
W.P(MD)No.7211 of 2019
25.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
