Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 1312
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, (MADURAI BENCH)
P. VELMURUGAN, K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.
The District Collector, (Noon Meal Section), Office of the District Collector, Madurai and Anr. - Appellants
Versus
P. Pandiarajan - Respondent
W.A(MD)No.1351 of 2024
Decided On : 13-08-2024
For the Appellants : Mr. M. Sarangan, Additional Govt. Pleader.
For the Respondent: Mr. P. Mahendran.
IMPORTANT POINT
Male legal heirs can be considered for compassionate appointment when no suitable female heirs are available, as per government orders.
Headnote:
Compassionate Appointment - Writ Appeal - G.O.Ms.No.215, G.O.Ms.No.198, G.O.Ms.No.48 - The court interpreted the government orders regarding compassionate appointments, emphasizing that male heirs can be considered when no suitable female heirs are available, leading to the decision to uphold the lower court's ruling.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent sought compassionate appointment after the death of his mother, a government employee, but was initially rejected due to the presence of female heirs. The court had to consider the implications of various government orders on this matter.
Issues: Whether the respondent, as a male legal heir, could be appointed on compassionate grounds despite the presence of female heirs.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of suitable female heirs and the no objection from them allowed for the consideration of the male heir for compassionate appointment.
Result: The Writ Appeal was dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(P. Velmurugan, J.) :
(Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act praying this Court to set aside the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.667 of 2024, dated 15.3.2024.)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.667 of 2024, dated 15.3.2024.
2. The respondent’s mother was working as Assistant Cook in Tamil Nadu Government Noon Meal Scheme at K.Perumalpatti Panchayat Union Primary School, T.Kallupatti Panchayat Union, Madurai District..While in service, she died on 17.4.2018 survived by the respondent and two of his sisters. The Petitioner/respondent herein made an application, dated 25.6.2018 before the first appellant for compassionate appointment on the ground of sudden death of his mother. Since the Writ Petitioner’s application was not considered by the appellants, he filed a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.15559 of 2023 before this Court. This Court also directed the respondents therein to consider the representation of the Petitioner, dated 25.6.2018 and pass appropriate orders by order, dated 24.8.2023. Based on the said order, the Writ Petitioner sent a detailed representation along with a copy of the order of this Court. Since the appellants have not taken any steps to consider his representation based on the order of this Court, he issued a contempt notice. Thereafter, the first respondent passed a rejection order on 22.12.2023. Challenging the same, the respondent filed a writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.667 of 2024, The Writ Court after considering the matter, allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the rejection order passed by the first appellant, dated 22.12.2023 and directed the appellants to provide compassionate appointment to the respondent herein within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Challenging the same, the appellants have filed the present Writ Appeal before this Court.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that as per G.O.Ms215, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meals Programme Department, dated 8.9.1998, only female members are eligible to be appointed in the post of Organizers and cooks and that in G.O.Ms.No.198, dated 25.10.2007, only when no female members are available in the family of the deceased Noon Meal staff, the male member can be considered and in such a case, he could be appointed only as a cook in Puratchithalaivar Dr.MGR Nutririous Meal Programme as per G.O.Ms.No.215, Social Welfare and Noon Meal Programme, dated 8.9.1998. The said power has been given only to the District Colletors themselves namely, the first appellant herein. In this case, female legal heirs of the deceased worker is available. Therefore, the respondent is only a male member and he could not be recommended and even as per G.O.Ms.No.78, Social Welfare and Noon Meal Programme Department, dated 25.10.2026 followed it with a clarification of the Government in Govt.Letter No.13658/NMP 4-2/2016-1, dated 17.2.2017 by stating that if the female heirs of the deceased worker is available, the male member should not be recommended and the same was communicated to all the District Collectors and subordinates by the Director of Social Welfare and Women Empowerment Department, Chennai vide letter No.12751/E3-4/2016, dated 17.3.2017.
4. Further he would submit that the Government of Tamil Nadu has taken a policy decision and issued Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.48,Social Welfare and Women Empowerment(NM 4.2) Department, dated 18.8.2021 only female heirs of the deceased workers of Noon Meal Programme Scheme could be given appointment on compassionate grounds basing on their eligibility criteria and that no male legal heirs are eligible to be given appointment on compassionate grounds. In this case, the deceased worker was having three legal heirs among them, 2 of them are female legal heirs and one is the respondent, a male legal heir.. When the female heirs are available and as per various Government Orders and Government sc
