The time limit for applying for compassionate employment is not a strict limitation period and can be relaxed in exceptional circumstances.

D. RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THE respondents Authorities of the Food Corporation of India, Madras, in W. P. No. 7863 of 1986 are the appellants in the above Writ Appeal which has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated April 26, 1996 allowing the Writ Petition and granting certain specified reliefs in the light or the subsequent development in the case.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that one late Varadhan who was working as a Picker under the second appellant died on October 13, 1984 and thereafter the writ petitioner, said to be the wife of late Varadhan claimed for the settlement of the terminal benefits due to her deceased husband by sending a notice dated November 6, 1984 to the first appellant herein through her counsel. The writ petitioner was referred by the first appellant to the second appellant for further course of action and the second appellant by his communication dated February 7, 1985 called upon the writ petitioner to produce a legal heir certificate. Since some other lady was also staking her claim by causing the issuance of the lawyers notice to be the wife of the deceased, the writ petitioner was advised to obtain a succession certificate. On the production of the necessary materials and fact that the deceased Varadhan has disclosed in the family declaration that the writ petitioner was his wife and adverting to the conflicting claim made by another lady by name Muniammal, the second appellant has submitted the papers to the third appellant for appropriate orders settling the confliciting claims. It is in the above circumstances that the first appellant has informed both the writ petitioner and the other lady viz. , Muniammal as also their respective counsel to submit a succession certificate and death certificate to enable the authorities to finalise the terminal benefits to the legally wedded wife by a letter dated April 6, 1983.

( 3 ) WHILE matters stood thus, the writ petitioner also applied to the first appellant on February 1, 1986 for compassionate employment to any one of the Class IV posts in the Food Corporation of India offices in Madras City, in view of the sudden death of her husband and the dire and distress condition in which she was placed for her livelihood, marking copies of the same to the Zonal Manager and also the second and third appellants, The third appellant, by his communication, dated February 14, 1986 called upon the writ petitioner to produce certain particulars and records on February 14, 1986. Immediately thereafter, a communication dated February 26, 1986 was sent from the third appellant rejecting the request for compassionate appointment made by the writ petitioner on the ground that it was time barred when it was sent and it appears that the same was with reference to the proceedings of the first appellant dated February 7, 1986. At this stage the writ petitioner has filed W. P. No. 7863 of 1986 for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for and quash the proceedings of the third respondent therein dated February 26, 1986 and for a consequential direction to direct the respondents in the writ petition (appellants in the above appeal) to appoint the writ petitioner as a Class IV employee under the DDE quota. For the sake of completeness of the factual details, it may be also stated that counsel for the writ petitioner initiated steps and, obtained succession certificate in C. A. No. 20 of 1986 dated April 8, 1986 in favour of the writ petitioner and by a letter dated June 4, 1986 the said succession certificate was also forwarded in continuation of the earlier records submitted. The first appellant, by his communication dated June 20, 1986 forwarded all these papers and submitted proposals to the Regional Director of Food Corporation of India Chennai House. Esplanade, Madras for finalising the terminal benefits due to the deceased worker to be paid in favour of the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner was also pursui