The rejection of an application for appointment under compassionate ground after a long period and the interpretation of relevant government orders.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 1st  respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.63781/Ne.Pe.8/1/2018-2, dated 14.06.2021 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant under compassionate ground in the light of the G.O.Ms.No.1499, Labour & Employment (Q1) Department dated 03.08.1989 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.)

1. The present writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 14.06.2021 passed by 1st  respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.63781/Ne.Pe.8/1/2018-2, consequently, directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant under compassionate ground in the light of the G.O.Ms.No.1499, Labour & Employment (Q1) Department dated 03.08.1989 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents and carefully perused the materials available on record.

3. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition is as follows:-

The petitioner's father worked as a Hospital worker in the 3rd respondent Government Hospital. While in service, he died on 17.06.2001. He was survived by his wife and the petitioner and the petitioner's younger brother. The petitioner's mother made an application on 21.02.2002, seeking an appointment under compassionate ground, within one year from the date of death of the employee. During the pendency of the said application, the petitioner's mother suffered spinal cord issue. Hence, the petitioner's mother gave letter to the 2nd  respondent on 13.02.2006 in person which sought for substitution of her name with that of the petitioner in the application seeking appointment on compassionate ground instead of her. By relying on G.O.Ms.No.18, Labour and Employment (Q1) Department dated 23.01.2020, the 1st respondent has passed the impugned order dated 14.06.2021, rejecting the application made by the petitioner's mother, stating that the petitioner was a minor at the time of original application dated 21.02.2002 and even on the date of the 2nd application dated 13.02.2006, the petitioner was a minor. On that basis, the impugned order came to be passed, rejecting the petitioner's mother application under compassionate ground. Challenging the same, this writ petition came to be filed.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the application seeking an appointment under compassionate ground was made within a period of one year from the date of death of the employee. Only because of the health issues, the petitioner's mother sought to substitute the name of the petitioner instead of her and sought employment for the petitioner. That apart, he further submitted that the application was submitted in the year of 2002, but the same was rejected only in the year 2021. The 3rdrespondent had considered and rejected the petitioner's application submitted by the petitioner's mother after the lapse of around 20 years. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the 1st       respondent failed to scrutinize the consolidated certificate where it is revealed that the petitioner and his family are living in penurious condition. Hence, the petitioner seeking an appointment under the compassionate ground and pressed for allowing the Writ Petition.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has filed a counter and he vehemently submitted that the application of the petitioner seeking an appointment under compassionate ground was made at the first instance by the petitioner's mother on 21.02.200