IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 10.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

W.P.No. 10039 of 2022

C.Ilayaraja ...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner of School Education,

DPI Campus College Road,

Chennai - 600 006

2. The Chief Educational Officer,

Krishnagiri District,

Krishnagiri

3.The District Educational Officer,

Krishnagiri District,

Krishnagiri

4. The Headmaster,

Government Higher Secondary School,

Ramapuram,

Krishnagiri District - 635112 ...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No-1677/Aal/2021 dated 16.08.2021 and to QUASH the same and consequently directing the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioner and regularize his service in the post of Junior Assistant/ Bill Collector from the initial date of appointment effect from 11.03.2015 with all consequential and attendant benefits.

For Petitioner : Mr. S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondents : Mr. P.Anandan Kumar Government Advocate

O R D E R

Aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for promotion and regularisaion of his appointment to the post of Junior Assistant from the date of his initial appointment, the petitioner is before this Court.

2. The facts that has led to the filing of this writ petition are as follows.

3. The petitioner’s father was employed as a Record Clerk in the

4^th respondent school and had died in harness in the year 1997, leaving the entire family in financial distress. Since the petitioner was qualified with higher secondary pass, he had submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds. On 10.03.2015, the petitioner was issued with an order of appointment as an Office Assistant in the 4^th respondent school, where the petitioner’s father was employed as a Record Clerk. He joined the duty on 11.03.2015.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that even on the date of appointment, he was eligible to be appointed as a Junior Assistant. The petitioner had excelled in his education and has to be appointed to the post of Junior Assistant based on his 12^th std qualification. The petitioner was unable to study further on account of his father’s demise and the family’s indigenous circumstances. However, the petitioner was only appointed as an Office Assistant. In fact, the 3^rd respondent while recommending proposal of the petitioner for compassionate appointment had recommended that he be appointed as a Junior Assistant based on his educational qualification, i.e., 12^th std pass. 5. The petitioner made a representations for appointment as Junior Assistant on 30.06.2017 and 06.08.2021, which was however not considered. It is also his contention that as per GO.Ms.No.1499, Labour & Employment (G1) Department dated 13.08.1989, the dependent who had been appointed to a lower post like Record Clerk, Office Assistant and Sweeper on compassionate grounds and who possess higher qualification required for the post of Junior Assistant at the time of initial appointment shall be appointed as Junior Assistant. Therefore, in the light of the above GO also the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Junior Assistant.

6. However, by the impugned order dated 16.08.2021, the 3^rd respondent who had originally recommended the petitioner’s appointment as a Junior Assistant had rejected the petitioner’s claim by stating that on the date of making his application, the petitioner had only passed 9^th std. Therefore, he was not entitled to be considered for the post of Junior Assistant. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

7. The 3^rd respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that on the date of death of the petitioner’s father, his mother Susila was an illiterate and was eligible for appointment only as a Sweeper. However, she had crossed the age limit of 50 years. Further, she was not willing to get appointed on compassionate grounds on account of