Madras High Court
S.Johnpal vs The Director General Of Police on 29 August, 2023
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.08.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
Writ Petition No.2992 of 2020
S.Johnpal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Director General of Police,
Mylapore,
Chennai-4.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai,
Veppery,
Chennai-7.
3.The Additional Commissioner of Police,
Traffic Zone,
Veppery,
Chennai-7. ... Respondents
PRAYER: The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the
impugned order in Na.Ka.No.Pa.Pi-3/Po/189/8037/2016 dated 06.12.2019 passed
by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct the
respondent to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Saravanan
For Respondents : Mr.M.Shahjahan,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the above writ petition praying for Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.Pa.Pi-
3/Po/189/8037/2016 dated 06.12.2019 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the
same and consequently to direct the respondent to provide compassionate
appointment to the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner's father Sebastin was working as Grade I Head Constable in the traffic
unit and during his employment he disappeared in the year 1996 from 30.04.1996
and by that time the petitioner was 8 years old. Since his father was not traced out
even after 7 years his mother filed a case in O.S.No.6441/2004 on the file of the
II Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai and thereby it was ordered on 14.06.2005
by declaring that his father Sebastin death as civil death. At the time of judgment
the petitioner was minor (14 years) and he attained majority in the year 2009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
3. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner's mother
applied for pension as well as other concession including compassionate
appointment and made a representation in the year 2005 for pension, death cum
service benefits and compassionate appointment in the year 2005, except
compassionate appointment other benefits were granted in the year 2007. He
further submitted that the petitioner's mother was not even informed to apply for
compassionate appointment to the respondent as stated at the time of his father's
civil death granted by the II Assistant City Civil Court and at that time the
petitioner was 15 years old and attained majority in the year 2008. Since there
was no progress about his compassionate appointment from the respondent he
made a representation on 30.09.2019 to the respondent as well as to the Chief
Minister Grievance Cell. Hence the petitioner has come forward with the present
writ petition.
4. Counter affidavit dated 01.07.2021 was filed by the third respondent.
Mr.M.Shahjahan, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents submitted that as per G.O.No.120, Labour & Employment
Department dated 26.06.1995 and Government clarification in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
letter(Ms).No.86/Q.1/2010, Labour & Employment Department dated
04.05.2010, the request for compassionate appointment should be submitted
within 3 years from the date of death of the Government Servant. In this case, the
date of death of Thiru.Sebastine (Civil death) was taken into calculation as
14.06.2005 as ordered by the Court. Since the petitioner's mother submitted the
request petition for compassionate appointment after three years and she was
given endorsement that due to the reasons stated above, there is no rule provision
for giving compassionate appointment in this office Endorsement
Rc.No.Estt.3/Tr./189/8037/2016, dated 06.12.2019 and the petitioner's mother
already been given similar endorsement on 13.04.2016 and 18.10.2019.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. In the instant case, though the petitioner's father was declared Civil
death as early as on 14.06.2005 and the petitioner has attained majority in the
year 2009, the application for compassionate appointment was submitted
belatedly only after 7 years i.e., in the year 2016 and that too by the mother of the
petitioner and not by the petitioner. As per G.O.No.120, Labour & Employment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
Department dated 26.06.1995, the application for compassionate appointment
should have been submitted within three years from the date of death of the
employee i.e., Sebastine who has been declared Civil death on 14.06.2005. So if
three years is calculated the application should have been given on or before
14.06.2008 but in this case it was submitted only in the year 2016. Hence, the
relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted.
7. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the
third respondent.
8. In the result, the the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
29.08.2023
dpq
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order: Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
To
1.The Director General of Police,
Mylapore,
Chennai-4.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai,
Veppery,
Chennai-7.
3.The Additional Commissioner of Police,
Traffic Zone,
Veppery,
Chennai-7.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
dpq
W.P.No.2992 of 2020
29.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
