The legal point established is that the requirement of registration for employment assistance should be based on the Personal Laws of the government servant, and the presumption of valid adoption under HAMA Section 16 should be considered, emphasizing the aim of preventing bogus claims while considering legitimate demands of adopted children for employment assistance.

1. This writ petition came to be posted before this Court on being specially ordered by the Hon’ble Chief Justice vide order dated 25.03.2011.

2. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner, seeking to challenge the order of the first respondent State made in G.O.Ms.No.(2D)No.68, Rural Development Department dated 16.07.2002, dated 16.07.2002 and the consequential show cause notice dated 31.08.2002 made by the third respondent District Collector, Tirunelveli and the proceedings dated 27.11.2002 made by the 4th respondent, the Commissioner of Valliyur Panchayat Union.

2. By the impugned order dated 16.07.2002, the third respondent was directed to issue a show cause notice and after getting appropriate explanation was directed to cancel the appointment of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said direction issued by the State Government, the District Collector issued the Show Cause notice dated 31.08.2002 asking him to explain as to why his services could not be terminated. He was informed that the petitioner was taken on adoption by late R.Meenal, who was working as maternity Ayah under the Nanguneri Panchayat. It was claimed that the adoption was not registered as per law and therefore, the petitioner could not have claimed appointment on compassionate grounds on account of the death of his adoptive mother. The said claim was contrary to G.O.Ms.No.2899 Labour and Employment Department, dated 23.12.1988.

3. On receipt of the said show cause notice, the petitioner sought for copies of the G.O.Ms.No.2899 dated 23.12.1988 and G.O.Ms.No.(2D)No.68, dated 16.07.2002.

When the petitioner was reminded by the 4th respondent about his not having submitted his explanation vide memo dated 27.11.2002, the petitioner moved this Court challenging the show cause notice issued pursuant to the direction by the State Government.

4. The writ petition was admitted on 17.12.2002. Pending the writ petition, this Court granted an interim stay of the show cause notice. Subsequently, when the matter came up on 18.09.2003, this Court found that since the stay order has been in force for more than 9 months, it was not necessary to vacate the said order and the stay was made absolute.

5. Thereafter, the third respondent District Collector, had filed a counter affidavit dated 04.01.2004.

6. The facts leading to the filing of the case were as follows:

The petitioner’s aunt (father’s sister) R.Meenal was working as a Maternity Ayah under the Nanguneri Panchayat. While she was in service, on 21.07.1974 she had adopted her nephew, (the present petitioner) as her son. It was claimed that necessary customs and rituals were followed while adopting the petitioner. The petitioner’s biological parents also gave him in adoption to R.Meenal. The said Meenal also had executed a registered Will on 03.03.1988, wherein, she had clearly mentioned that the petitioner was her adopted son. Unfortunately, she died on 31.03.1988 leaving her adopted son as the only legal heir. The petitioner had also obtained a legal heir certificate from the Tahsildar, Nanguneri Taluk. In that certificate dated 27.07.1990, the name of the petitioner was indicated as the adopted son of late R.Meenal.

7. The State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.225 Labour and Employment Department, dated 15.02.1972 as well as G.O.Ms.No.560 Labour and Employment Department, dated 03.08.1977 that adopted children were also entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds.

8. The petitioner requested the District Collector, Tirunelveli, to grant him appointment on compassionate grounds as an Office Assistant in the 4th respondent Panchayat Union. After verification of records and making oral enquiries as well as calling for a report from the Tahsildar, getting affidavits from elders and relatives in the locality, the third respondent by an order dated 05.07.1991 appointed the petitioner as an Office Assistant in the 4th respondent Valliyur Panchayat Union. His appointment was also approved by the Panchayat Un