Madras High Court

R.Thirupathi vs The Chairman-Cum-Managing ... on 28 March, 2022

Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.03.2022

CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA

Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

R.Thirupathi ... Appellant

vs.

1. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation &
Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002.

2. The Chief Engineering Personnel,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation &
Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002.

3. The Superintending Engineer,
Thirupathur Electricity Distributing Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation &
Distribution Corporation Ltd.,
Thirupathur – 635 601. ... Respondents

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 15.03.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1015 of 2018.

Page No.1 of 9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

For Appellant : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran

For Respondents : Mr.P.Subramanian,
Standing Counsel

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court delivered by S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.)

Challenging the order dated 15.03.2019 passed by the learned Single

Judge in W.P.No.1015 of 2018, the Writ Petitioner has come up with the

present Writ Appeal.

2. Before the learned Single Judge, the stand taken by the learned

counsel for the Writ Petitioner was that, the Application seeking

compassionate appointment was filed within the time limit as prescribed

under the Scheme. However, the said Application was rejected vide

impugned proceedings dated 05.10.2016 passed by the 3rd Respondent herein

on the ground that, the mother of the Writ Petitioner was already employed in

the Respondent Board itself.

3. Before the learned Single Judge, though it was the case of the

Writ Petitioner that, his mother was employed on temporary basis and that,

she is not a regular employee, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

Petition by holding that, the purpose of granting appointment on

compassionate ground is to mitigate the circumstances arising out of and on

account of the sudden demise of the deceased employee and to ensure that,

the family is not having any other source of income. For better appreciation,

relevant portion of the order passed by the learned Single Judge is usefully

extracted below:

“7. The penurious circumstances is to be interpreted if there is no person employed in the family of the deceased employee and there is no source of income for the family. Two criteria are very important. No other legal heir is employed with the organization in question and the family has no other source of income. Even in case, where nobody in the family is employed and the family is not having any source of income from other means, then the legal heir can seek for a compassionate appointment for the family.”

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner as also the learned Standing

Counsel appearing for the Respondent/Electricity Board drew the attention of

this Court to clause 1(ii) of the Board's proceedings vide B.P.(Ch) No.330,

dated 02.11.1993 and the same is extracted below:

“1(ii) It is considered that if a member of the family is already in employment and supports the family, then the restriction that if there is

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

already any earning member in the family of the Government servant who died in harness, the other dependents of the deceased Government Servant will not be eligible for compassionate appointment may be applied. When a dependant of the family is employed, the factors to be ascertained are, whether he is regularly employed and is actually supporting the family. If that person was employed even before the death of the Government Servant and was living separately without extending any help to the family, then the case of other eligible dependent will be considered.

5. A reading of the said clause would make it clear that,

compassionate appointment will have to be granted to a person to mitigate the

circumstances arising out of the death of an earning member and that, if there

is already an earning member in the family of the Government Servant, who

died in harness, the other dependents may not be entitled to compassionate

appointment. However, it has been stated that, if any family member even

before the death of the Government Servant was living separately, without

extending any support to the family, one of the other eligible dependents will

be considered.

6. Learned counsel for the Appellant also drew the attention of this

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

Court to clause 3(vi) of the Board's proceedings vide FB TANGEDCO

Proceedings No.11, dated 11.06.2020, and the same is extracted hereunder:

3(vi) If any member of the deceased TANGEDCO/TANTRANSCO Employee's family is working on Temporary/Part time basis such as noon-meal organizer and Helpers, and those who work on daily wages, the other dependents of the family may be considered for providing appointment.

7. In the case on hand, the mother of the Writ Petitioner was

appointed as a part-time Government Servant and was working in a regular

time scale and she has not been made as a permanent employee. As she is not

a regular employee, at any time, axe may fall on her and her employment

could be deprived. Part-time employment cannot be interpreted that, a person

is employed on a permanent basis.

8. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for

the Respondent Board that, the Writ Petitioner and his mother were living

under the same roof and that, there is no need to provide compassionate

appointment to the Writ Petitioner, cannot be accepted. As long as, the other

dependents of the deceased employee, who are in employment are not in a

permanent job, definitely, beneficial interpretation has to be given to

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

B.P.(Ch) No.330, dated 02.11.1993 and the case of the Writ Petitioner has to

be considered for compassionate appointment.

9. It is represented that, the request of the Writ Petitioner for

compassionate appointment was once again rejected by the 3rd Respondent

vide proceedings dated 16.09.2020, based on TANGEDCO Proceedings

No.11, dated 11.06.2020. If the Respondent Board is going to extend the

benefits of Board's proceedings No.11 to the Writ Petitioner, certainly, the

Writ Petitioner would be entitled to the same.

10. Even though, it has been contended by the learned Standing

Counsel appearing for the Respondent/Electricity Board that, reference to FB

TANGEDCO Proceedings No.11, dated 11.06.2020 may not be applicable to

the facts of this case, the said proceedings cannot be held retrospectively and

even going by B.P.(Ch) No.330, dated 02.11.1993, the case of the Writ

Petitioner will have to be considered for compassionate appointment.

11. Hence, we are of the view that, the order of the learned Single

Judge in declining to grant relief to the Writ Petitioner is liable to be

interfered with and accordingly, the same is set aside.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

12. Respondent/Electricity Board is granted four months' time from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to consider the case of the Writ

Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, depending upon the

seniority list, if any, maintained for the purpose of providing compassionate

appointment.

In fine, the Writ Appeal is allowed on the above terms. No costs.




                                                                            [S.V.N.,J.]  [N.M.,J.]
                                                                                 28.03.2022
                    Index                  :     Yes/No
                    Speaking Order         :     Yes/No

                    (aeb)






https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                             Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022




                    To:

1. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

2. The Chief Engineering Personnel, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Thirupathur Electricity Distributing Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., Thirupathur – 635 601.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal No.599 of 2022

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

AND N.MALA,J.

(aeb)

Judgment in W.A.No.599 of 2022

28.03.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis