Madras High Court
G.Ramyashree vs The Superintendent Engineer on 4 February, 2021
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
G.Ramyashree ...Petitioner
Vs.
The Superintendent Engineer,
Madurai Electricity Distribution Circle/
Metropolitan, Madurai-7. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the respondent under his impugned proceedings bearing
No.f.vz;.910-2/Bk.bgh/bgU/kJ/epm/epgp2/c3/Bfh.eP.t/2020 ehs; 01.09.2020 and
set aside the same s ultra virus, illegal, not valid in law and consequently
directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner in a suitable
employment in the office of the respondent on the basis of her
representation dated 08.2020 under the compassionate ground, within a
time frame as may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ponniah
For Respondent : Mr.T.Sakthikumaran
Standing Counsel
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/4
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
ORDER
The main ground on which the petitioner seeks for
compassionate appointment is that the petitioner is entitled to make an
application within a period of three months from the date on which she
attained majority. This issue came to be considered by the Hon'ble Full
Bench of this Court in the case of K.Shanmugam Vs. Tamil Nadu State
Transport Corporation, rep. by its Managing Director, Villupuram in
W.P (MD) No.7016 of 2011 etc., and the Hon'ble Full Bench of this
Court had held that the belated application within a period of three years
after the legal heir attained majority is impermissible. The relevant
portion of the order reads as follows:-
“29.The arguments of Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned
Senior Counsel, cannot be accepted in absence to a
challenge to the schemes or the Government orders. The
argument of Mr.R.Singaravelan assailing the three years
limitation within which the application has to be made for
appointment on compassionate basis cannot be entertained
without any challenge raised to the relevant scheme or G.Os.
If the scheme does nto permit entertaining an application by
a dependant after attaining majority then such an
application cannot be considered.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
31.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar Vs.
State of Bihar, (2000) 7 SCC 192, has held that when the very
purpose of compassionate appointment is to see that the
family gets immediate relief, then the application by the
dependant of the deceased employee filed after he attains
majority cannot be entertained. Considering a belated
application will be contrary to the scheme framed by the
Government and will be also contrary to the judgments of the
Supreme Court.”
2.In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Full Bench as
aforesaid, the present request of the petitioner seeking for compassionate
appointment cannot be sustained.
3.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
04.02.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
cp
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
M.S.RAMESH, J.
cp
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.
W.P.(MD) No.19492 of 2020
04.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
