Madras High Court
G.G.Sharma vs The Director Of School Education on 17 December, 2021
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.12.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
Writ Appeal No.1127 of 2021
G.G.Sharma ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Director of School Education
DPI Complex, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Chief Education Officer
Salem District, Salem
3.The District Education Officer
Sankagiri, Salem District
4.The Headmaster
Government High School
Kaveripuram Post, Mettur Taluk,
Salem District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
order dated 27.07.2020 made in W.P.No.9654 of 2020.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Doraisamy
for Mr.V.Elangovan
For Respondents : Ms.Mythereya Chandra
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
(Delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
Challenging the order dated 27.07.2020 passed in W.P. No.9654 of
2020, the writ petitioner has filed the above writ appeal.
2. The appellant has filed the writ petition to issue a writ of
certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order of
rejection dated 26.05.2020 on the file of the first respondent and to quash
the same and consequently, directing the respondents to provide suitable
employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground.
3. It is not in dispute that the father of the appellant had died in
harness on 18.07.2001 and that his mother made an application for
compassionate appointment on 29.10.2001. Subsequently, the said
application was remanded back to the applicant, namely Tmt.Selvakumari,
for want of additional details. Thereafter, the writ petitioner submitted a
fresh application dated 21.03.2018 seeking for compassionate appointment.
4. The learned single Judge, taking into consideration the submission
made by both the parties, dismissed the writ petition. Challenging the same,
the above writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioner.
5. On a careful consideration of the materials available, it could be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
seen that the appellant's mother submitted her application seeking for
compassionate appointment on 29.10.2001. In the order impugned in the
writ petition, the first respondent has stated that the application submitted
by the mother of the appellant was remanded back to her for want of
additional details. Instead of re-presenting the application, the appellant
submitted a fresh application after a lapse of 16 years. It is settled law that
an application seeking for compassionate appointment should be made
within three years from the date of death of the employee.
6. Mr.S.Doraisamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that, as per G.O. (Ms) No.18 Labour and Employment (Q1)
Department dated 23.01.2020, if the applicant (legal heir of the deceased
Government Servant) died after applying for compassionate ground
appointment, an alternative application may be accepted from the another
legal heir of the deceased Government servant, subject to the conditions
prescribed for compassionate ground appointment and therefore, the
application submitted by the appellant should have been accepted by the
respondent.
7. But, on a careful perusal of the said Government Order, it is clear
that the said Government Order is applicable only in the case of the
applicant, who is the legal heir of the deceased Government servant had
died after applying for compassionate ground appointment. In such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
circumstances, alternatively an application may be accepted from another
legal heir of the deceased Government servant. In the case on hand, the
mother of the appellant, namely Tmt.Selvakumari, is very much alive and
therefore, the said Government Order, cannot be made applicable to the
case of the appellant.
7. So far as the remand of the application to Tmt.Selvakumari seeking
for additional details is concerned, the appellant has not disputed the said
contention in the affidavit filed in support of his writ petition. In these
circumstances, the application submitted by the appellant after a lapse of 16
years, cannot be considered. The learned single Judge has rightly dismissed
the writ petition. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the
learned single Judge.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, there is no
order as to costs.
[M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.]
17.12.2021
Asr
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
To
1.The Director of School Education
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
DPI Complex, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Chief Education Officer
Salem District, Salem
3.The District Education Officer
Sankagiri, Salem District
4.The Headmaster
Government High School
Kaveripuram Post, Mettur Taluk,
Salem District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No.1127 of 2021
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
Asr
Writ Appeal No.1127 of 2021
17.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
