Madras High Court
L.Rajagopal vs The Commissioner Of Police on 12 October, 2022
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.10.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
L.Rajagopal ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Commissioner of Police
Commissioner office,
Greater Chennai,
Vepery, Chennai. ... Respondent
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the
respondent in impugned proceedings No.Na.Ka.No.K.A.P.N/66/13934/2017
dated 21.03.2017 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to appoint
the petitioner in any suitable post on compassionate ground.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.R.Ravi
For Respondent : Mr.S.Rajesh
Government Advocate
ORDER
The order of rejection rejecting the claim of the Writ Petitioner for
compassionate appointment is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
2.The Writ Petitioner states that his father A.Loganathan served as a Head
Constable in the Police Department and died on 26.05.1993, while he was in
service. The petitioner was a minor at the time of the death of his father. Thus,
he was not eligible during the relevant point of time. He submitted an application
seeking appointment on compassionate ground on 25.07.2002, after a lapse of
about nine years from the date of the death of the deceased employee. Thus, the
authorities have summarily rejected the application.
3.The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the
respondents relying on the counter affidavit made a submission that the deceased
Government servant nominated in the Service Record that Smt.Revathi is his
wife. He has suppressed the second marriage with Smt.Shanthi (mother of the
petitioner). The petitioner has not produced any order of divorce or otherwise in
respect of his father's first marriage with Smt.Revathi. That apart, the petitioner
himself has given a letter in writing on 17.09.2009, that he is not willing to
pursue the appointment on compassionate grounds. Since, the petitioner himself
has withdrawn the application seeking appointment on compassionate ground,
the authorities have rejected the same. However, the petitioner subsequently turn
around and filed the present Writ Petition.
4. The principles governing the Scheme of Compassionate Appointment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
has been considered by the Supreme Court in the recent judgments as under:-
1. Union of India and others vs. Amrita Sinha in C.A.No.7640 –
7641 of 2021 dated 11.12.2021 [(2021) 15 Scale 174]
2. Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika vs. Ahmednagar Mahanagar
Palika Kamgar Union [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 739]
3. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA vs. NITIN [2022 LiveLaw
(SC) 690]
4. The State of Maharashtra and another vs. Ms.Madhuri
Maruti Vidhate (Since after marriage Smt.Madhuri Santhosh Koli) [2022
LiveLaw (SC) 820]
5. Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd & Ors. vs.
Anusree K.B. [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 819]
5. This Court is of the considered opinion that the father of the Writ
Petitioner died in the year 1993 and almost 29 years lapsed. At this length of
time, the scheme of compassionate appointment cannot be extended in favour of
the Writ Petitioner. That apart, the petitioner himself had withdrawn the
application submitted before the competent authorities.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No Costs.
12.10.2022
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Speaking order : Yes
ep/ssr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
To
The Commissioner of Police
Commissioner office,
Greater Chennai,
Vepery, Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
ssr
W.P.No.29747 of 2017
12.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
