ORDER :

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

“to call for the records pertaining to ROC No E3/4465/2019 dated 01 08 2019 issued by R 1 /TTD as bad illegal unfair arbitrary discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently direct the R1 to appoint the petitioner as junior assistant based on his seniority amongst claimants under medical invalidation grounds basing on availability of such vacancy with all consequential benefits or alternatively at least appoint the petitioner as Shroff/Assistant with effect from 19 03 2014 the date on which the party respondent No 2 who is admittedly junior to the petitioner in the list of claimants under MIG with all consequential benefits by issuance of writ of mandamus and to pass such other or further orders…….”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the mother of the petitioner Smt B.Suseela, Multi-Purpose Worker (MPW) retired from service on medical invalidation grounds vide proceedings dated 16.08.2011. She applied for appointment of her son i.e., the petitioner herein for appointment under medical invalidation grounds vide representation dated 08.09.2011. the petitioner also submitted a representation dated 08.11.2011 for the same purpose. The petitioner is a graduate and he submitted all the necessary documents for appointment as sought for by the respondent.

The 1st respondent vide Notice in Rc.No.E2/17181/2013, dated 06.01.2014 informed the petitioner and other such similar claimants that compassionate appointment on medical invalidation grounds shall be limited to 5% of direct recruitment vacancies. The 2nd respondent was appointed as Shroff/Assistant in the 1st respondent organization vide proceedings No.E4/3581/2014, dated 19.03.2014. Subsequently, the petitioner made a representation dated 26.02.2016 seeking for appointment under Medical Invalidation grounds. Thereafter, vide proceedings dated 02.05.2016, the petitioner was appointed as Office Subordinate. Accordingly, the petitioner made another representation dated 23.11.2016 raising the issue of injustice of appointing him as Office Subordiante/Attender while appointing others as Junior Assistant and/or such similar posts.

It is further stated that the petitioner has filed W.P.No.7358 of 2019 before this Court and the same was disposed of on 14.06.2019 directed the TTD authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26.02.2016, 23.11.2016 and 19.02.2019 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In pursuance of the same, the respondent No.1/TTD allegedly considered the representations of the petitioner under purported implementation of the order of this Court referred above and rejected the same vide proceedings vide Roc.No.E3/4465/2019, dated 01.08.2019, which is impugned in the present writ petition.

3. Counter affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent denying all the averments made in the petition and contended that the dependents of employees retired on MIG informed that, the date of retirement on MIG is to be taken as criteria to count for priority for providing compassionate appointment to the post of Junior Assistant and prepared list of cases pending on MIG vide Notice Roc.No.E2/17181/2013, dated 6.1.2014 and accordingly the name of the mother of the petitioner retired on 17.8.2011 and applied for appointment on 8.11.2011 was mentioned as Sl.No.2, whereas, the father of the 2nd respondent retired on 30.11.2012 and applied for appointment on 10.01.2013 was mentioned at Sl.No.3. subsequently the 2nd respondent requested to provide employment in the cadre of Shroff/Assistant under compassionate grounds at an early date, for which she has been facing lot of financial crises vide her representations dated 4.2.2014, 10.2.2014, 25.2.2014 and 4.3.2014. accordingly, the management considered her request and issued appointment orders to her as Shroff/Assistant vide proc dated 19.3.2014. However, at that time, the petitioner did not file any o