Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, J.
S.Shahana - Petitioner
Versus
Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO) - Respondents
W.P(MD) No.6271 of 2026 and W.M.P(MD) No.5244 of 2026
Decided On : 08-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of mother's death and repeated compassionate applications rejected. (Para 3) |
| 2. petitioner's timely application; respondents cite delay and age. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. regulations impose no minimum age at application; only post-appointment. (Para 5 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. first application timely; rejections unsustainable. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. orders quashed; direct compassionate appointment. (Para 14) |
ORDER :
Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, J.
Heard Ms.H.Jasima Yasmin, learned Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates for petitioner and Mr.B.Ramanathan learned Standing Counsel for respondent Board.
Thereafter, the petitioner made an application seeking compassionate appointment by submitting her application dated 21.06.2022. However, the said request of the petitioner was rejected by the 3rd respondent on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted application for compassionate appointment within three years from the date of demise of her mother and also on the ground that the minimum age of the petitioner at the time of submitting the application should be 18 years. Notwithstanding the said rejection order dated 28.07.2022, the petitioner submitted yet another application on 25.10.2023 and the same was also rejected by the 3rd respondent through proceedings bearing No.019562/
dated 10.11.2023. Aggrieved by the said proceedings dated 28.07.2022 and 10.11.2023, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.3. The respondent No.3 filed counter affidavit reiterating the twin grounds that are stated in the impugned proceedings for denying the compassionate appointment of the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has approached the respondents by submitting appropriate application seeking compassionate appointment within a period of two years i.e., on 04.08.2020, but the same was not considered at the relevant point of time and the petitioner was required to submit her application after settling the terminal benefits of her deceased mother. Therefore, the petitioner submitted application after settlement of the terminal benefits and the same was rejected erroneously on the ground that the petitioner submitted the application belatedly.
5. Insofar as the minimum age of 18 years is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court, the relevant provision governing the situation, wherein it is stated that there should be no minimum age limit for the applicant on the date of application for appointment. The relevant Regulation, viz., clause 6 reads as under :
“6. Age limit. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these regulations governing the post for which appointment on compassionate grounds is to be made, on the date of application for appointment,-
(a) the spouse of the deceased or medically invalidated employee or the parent of the deceased employee, must not have completed fifty years of age; and
(b) the son, daughter, brother or sister of the deceased or medically invalidated employee must not have completed forty years of age.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in these regulations governing the post for which appointment on compassionate grounds is to be made, there shall be no minimum age limit for the applicant on the date of application for appointment
Provided that ap
No minimum age limit for compassionate appointment applications; must complete 18 years before appointment; timely initial application not vitiated by deferral.
The court emphasized that applications for compassionate appointment should consider the applicant's age and circumstances, particularly when the applicant was a minor at the time of the parent's dea....
Compassionate appointments must adhere to strict timelines and cannot be claimed as a right, emphasizing the need for timely applications to address immediate financial crises.
Compassionate appointment is an exception to recruitment rules, strictly bound by a limitation period for application, ensuring it addresses immediate financial crises.
Compassionate appointment claims must be made promptly; significant delays undermine eligibility and the purpose of immediate relief.
The court clarified that applications for compassionate appointment cannot be denied based on age limits for minors, underlining that earlier applications filed by guardians are valid.
Applications for compassionate appointments by guardians on behalf of minors must be recognized and deemed valid if submitted within the established time limits.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
