Madras High Court
Sarath Kumar vs The Chairman on 24 March, 2022
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 24.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
Sarath Kumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chairman,
TANGEDCO,
No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel),
TANGEDCO,
No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
3.The Superintending Engineer,
Kancheepuram Electricity
Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO, Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking to issue a writ of Declaration, declaring the rejection of
job assistance on compassionate ground K.No.6092 / Supt. Eng /
Adm.2 / Job Comp. Appt. / 2015 dated 12.01.2015 and K.No.008210 /
Supt. Eng /TVM / Adm.2 / U.4 / Job Comp. Appt. / 2020 dated
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
30.12.2020 as void and consequently direct the respondent Board to
provide job assistance to the petitioner herein on compassionate ground
by consider petitioner's request for job assistance.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Manoharan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subramanian
Standing Counsel
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of
Declaration, declaring the rejection orders dated 12.01.2015 and
30.12.2020 as void and consequently direct the respondent Board to
give employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground.
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
4. The case of the petitioner in brief:
The petitioner's father late Selvam, while he was in service under
the respondent Board, died on 16.02.2013, leaving behind the
petitioner, his mother and sister and grand parent and at the time of
death of his father, he was aged 13 years. The petitioner's application
dated 03.11.2014 seeking employment assistance on compassionate
ground was rejected, since he was minor. After attaining majority, he
applied on 14.10.2019. However, it was rejected that the application
made beyond the period of three years. Hence this writ petition.
5. Admittedly, when his father died on 16.02.2013, the petitioner
was a minor and was not eligible for appointment. After a period of
nearly 6 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 Venkatesan
versus The Chairman, TNEB, Chennai and others ” in
W.P.No.33500 of 2014, dated 11.10.2018, wherein, it has been
observed as under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
“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
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. ....”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
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 reported in (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 otherwise, to state that as and when such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
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
dependants 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
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. The identical issue came up before the Honourable Division
Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1749 of 2019 (Sudhanthira Devi vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu and others) [in the said Judgment, myself
(DKKJ) is one of the member] and the Division Bench, by Judgment
dated 03.09.2019, following the decisions of the Honourable Supreme
Court, has held that applications for compassionate appointment
submitted beyond the period of three years cannot be entertained.
8. 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
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.
9. In the light of the above decisions supra, no relief can be
granted, as there is no illegality in the impugned rejection orders dated
12.01.2015 and 30.12.2020. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is
dismissed. No costs.
24.03.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
mst
To
1.The Chairman,
TANGEDCO, No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel),
TANGEDCO, No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
3.The Superintending Engineer,
Kancheepuram Electricity Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO, Kancheepuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
mst
W.P.No.6728 of 2022
24.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
