IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
K. Lokesh - Appellant
Versus
The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., Chennai 7 Others - Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 2847 of 2019
Decided On : 05-03-2021
Compassionate Appointment - Employment Assistance - B.P.(FB).No.46, dated 13.10.1995, Memo No.038525/587/G8/G82/2001-2, dated 24.05.2001 - 2011 (4) SCC 209 - W.P.(MD).No.7016 of 2011 - [Compassionate Appointment] - [Employment Assistance] - [B.P.(FB).No.46, dated 13.10.1995, Memo No.038525/587/G8/G82/2001-2, dated 24.05.2001] - The court dismissed the Writ Appeal, upholding the rejection of the claim for compassionate appointment on the ground of delay and in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the respondents/TANGEDCO. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Bhawani Prasad Sonkar Vs. Union of India and a Full Bench decision of the court in W.P.(MD).No.7016 of 2011, which emphasized that compassionate appointment must be strictly followed in accordance with the relevant schemes and guidelines, and any deviation from the scheme is not permissible.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant's father, a TANGEDCO employee, passed away, and the appellant sought compassionate appointment. The application was rejected due to delay in submission and failure to meet the conditions of the relevant scheme.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the Writ Appeal, upholding the rejection of the claim for compassionate appointment on the ground of delay and in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the respondents/TANGEDCO.
Issues: Delay in submission of compassionate appointment application, compliance with the relevant scheme and guidelines.
Ratio Decidendi: Compassionate appointment must be strictly followed in accordance with the relevant schemes and guidelines, and any deviation from the scheme is not permissible.
Final Decision: The Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
JUDGMENT :
R. Subbiah, J.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.22036 of 2019, on the file of this Court.
This Writ Appeal is filed as against the order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in the Writ Petition in W.P.No.22036 of 2019 which was filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent in Lr.No.31307 / 722 / Ku.Tha.Po. / Vae / Ni.Pi.3 / U2 / Va.Vay / 2019, dated 25.02.2019, which was confirmed by the order of the third respondent passed in Lr.No.27336/Ni.Pi.3/U2/2013, dated 15.12.2013, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to provide suitable employment to the appellant/writ petitioner on compassionate grounds.
2. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 26.07.2019, in and by which, while considering all the aspects pertaining to compassionate appointment, as delivered in W.P.(MD).Nos.4129, 7045, 16624 and 20786 of 2014 and W.P.(MD).Nos.19455 and 19530 of 2018 (S.Gowtham Balu Vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai), dated 24.09.2018 and also taking note of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Bhawani Prasad Sonkar Vs. Union of India, reported in 2011 (4) SCC 209, held as follows:
9. In view of the above, this Court does not find any reason warranting interference with the orders impugned in this Writ Petition. Hence, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as devoid of merits. No costs.”
3. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the present Writ Appeal are as follows:
(b) It is the further case of the appellant/writ petitioner that his father was the only bread-winner of his family. After his demise, the appellant/writ petitioner’s mother was unable to maintain the family without any income and that his family had to struggle even for sustaining a living. Furthermore, the appellant/writ petitioner’s mother is an illiterate. Hence, she made a representation, dated 14.11.2013 to the third respondent seeking compassionate appointment for the appellant/writ petitioner. On 18.11.2013, the said representation/application was submitted in the prescri
Bhawani Prasad Sonkar Vs. Union of India
E.Ramasamy Vs. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
J.Jeba Mary Vs. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
Superintending Engineer, Madurai Electricity Distribution Circle, Madurai Vs. V.Jaya
Canara Bank and others Vs. M.Mahesh Kumar and others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.