IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 10.06.2024 DELIVERED ON : 01.07.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU W.A.No.2811 of 2022 S.Suresh ... Appellant Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector, Thanjavur Coimbatore Nagapattinam Highway, New Collector Office, AVP, Azhagammal Nagar, Thanjavur - 613 010.

3.The Tahsildar, Kumbakkonam. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 28.09.2022 in W.P.No.9896 of 2016.

For Appellant : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan, Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3

JUDGMENT

(Order of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)

This Intra Court appeal has been filed as against the order of the Writ Court dated 28.09.2022 made in W.P.No.9896 of 2016, in and by which the challenge made to the order of rejection of the claim of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment in proceedings dated 15.05.2014, was dismissed by this Court.

2. The writ petitioner is the appellant herein. The father of the appellant was employed as Village Assistant in Aasur Village and he died on 12.08.1997, while he was in service due to an accident. At the time of demise of his father, the appellant was a minor and therefore, his mother made an application for compassionate appointment on 25.05.1998. According to the petitioner, her mother was not given compassionate appointment till 2004 and therefore, she applied compassionate appointment to the appellant on 26.05.2004. Since, there was no action, the appellant submitted a detailed representation dated 05.05.2024 seeking compassionate appointment. The second respondent, vide order dated 15.05.2014, has rejected the application on the ground that compassionate ground appointment shall be granted only to the first applicant and no subsequent application or alternative application cannot be entertained. Challenging the rejection order passed by the second respondent, the appellant has filed the writ petition. The Writ Court dismissed the writ petition both on merits as well as on the ground of laches. Aggrieved by the order of the Writ Court, the present appeal has been filed.

3. Mr.M.Gnanasekaran, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that there is no delay in filing the writ petition, as the writ petition was filed in March 2016, challenging the order of rejection dated 15.05.2014 passed by the second respondent. It is contended that the application submitted by the mother of the appellant on 25.05.1998 was not considered by the respondents till the year 2004 without passing any orders and she was also directed to submit application seeking appointment to the appellant by a memo dated 10.09.2004, on completion of 18 years of age and only based on the directions of the third respondent, the mother of the application has submitted the application dated 26.05.2004 seeking appointment for the appellant and therefore, the impugned order of rejection passed by the second respondent is misconceived and the Writ Court has failed to consider these aspects in proper perspective and prays for interference.

4.Mr.V.Manoharan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 has drawn the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent and would submit that the mother of the applicant submitted the application seeking compassionate appointment on 25.05.1997 and it was rejected in the year 2004, as she had not met the eligility requisites. It is further contended that the appellant is not eligible for compassionate appointment as the application was submitted beyond the period of three years from the date of death of the deceased employee and there is no provision to entertain second application seeking appointment on compassionate ground and there