Madras High Court
S.Senthil Guru vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 5 January, 2021
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.01.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
S.Senthil Guru ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
2.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
O/o. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
Madurai Division, Commercial Tax Complex,
Madurai.
3.The Commercial Tax Officer,
Office of Commercial Tax,
Theni. .. Respondents
PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to
the order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Na.Ka.No.89/2018/A2, dated
06.07.2018 and the consequential impugned order passed by the 2nd
respondent vide Na.Ka.A10/3501/2015 dated 14.10.2019 and quash the same
1/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in any
suitable post on compassionate ground in the Department of Commercial Tax.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
For Respondents : Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified
mandamus, to quash the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide
Na.Ka.No.89/2018/A2, dated 06.07.2018 and the consequential impugned
order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka.A10/3501/2015 dated
14.10.2019 and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner
in any suitable post on compassionate ground in the Department of
Commercial Tax.
2.Heard Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Mrs.J.Padmavathi Devi, learned Special Government
Pleader, appearing for the respondents.
3.The petitioner's father while working as an Assistant in the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
Commercial Tax Department, died in harness on 19.12.2013. The petitioner's
mother had made an application to the respondents on 01.12.2014, seeking for
compassionate appointment to any of the legal heirs of the deceased employee.
The petitioner herein is the son of the deceased employee, who was a minor at
the time of his father's death. He attained the age of majority on 26.06.2017.
Thereafter, it is claimed that the petitioner's mother had made two other
representations on 29.06.2017 and 08.11.2017, seeking for compassionate
appointment in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has also given a
representation on 26.02.2020, seeking for compassionate appointment for
himself. By considering the original application of the petitioner's mother
dated 01.12.2014, the present impugned order, dated 06.07.2018 came to be
passed by the respondents, rejecting the claim for compassionate appointment
on the ground that on the date of completion of 3-year period, for making an
application for compassionate appointment, the petitioner was a minor and
therefore, on that ground the petitioner was ineligible to be considered for
compassionate appointment, in view of the Government Letter dated
04.05.2010. Challenging the said order dated 06.07.2018, the present writ
petition has been filed.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
4.The issues revolving around the procedure for compassionate
appointment were considered in various writ petitions before this Court, as
well as before the Honourable Supreme Court. Among such dictums laid in
these judgments, it has been held by a Honourable Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Chief Engineer/Personnel, TNEB Vs. S.Suder reported
in MANU/TN/0635/2009, that an application for compassionate appointment
can be made by a person within 3 years from the date on which he/she attains
majority. The Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Syed Khadim
Hussain Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2006 (9) SCC 195, has also held that
when a Widow has submitted an application in time, the Authorities should
consider such application expeditiously and grant an appointment to the minor
who had attained majority owing to the pendency of the application.
5.In the present case, though the petitioner was a minor at the time of
his father's death, his mother had made an application within 3 years from the
date of the death of his father, seeking compassionate appointment in favour
of any of his legal heirs. On attaining majority, (i.e., on 26.06.2017), the
petitioner had also given a representation dated 26.02.2020, seeking for
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
compassionate appointment for himself. By applying the propositions laid
down in the aforesaid decisions, it could be said that the application given by
the petitioner on 26.02.2020 is in continuance of the earlier application made
by the mother of the petitioner on 01.12.2014 and since the petitioner's
application dated 26.02.2020 was within a period of 3 years from the date of
his attaining majority, the respondents are not justified in rejecting the
petitioner's application on the ground that the petitioner was a minor within
the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of death of the employee. As
such, the impugned order itself cannot be sustained.
6.In the result, the impugned order passed by the third respondent vide
Na.Ka.No.89/2018/A2 dated 06.07.2018 and the consequential impugned
order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka.A10/3501/2015 dated
14.10.2019 are hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the second
respondent for reconsideration. The second respondent shall take into
consideration the observations made by this Court in the present order and
accordingly, pass fresh orders atleast within a period of twelve weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. While passing such orders, the second
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
respondent shall not quote the three year limitation period for filing the
application, as a bar or state that the petitioner was a minor during the check
period of three years from the date of the employee's death.
7.The writ petition stands allowed accordingly. No costs.
05.01.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
TM
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 Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
2.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
O/o. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax,
Madurai Division, Commercial Tax Complex, Madurai.
3.The Commercial Tax Officer, Office of Commercial Tax, Theni.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
M.S.RAMESH,J.
TM
W.P.(MD) No.15806 of 2020
05.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
