IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 04.02.2026 PRONOUNCED ON : 06.02.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WP No. 10718 of 2021 and WMP No. 11362 of 2021 A.Sathiyaraj ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The District Collector O/o. The District Collector, villupuram District, Villupuram.

2. The Tahsildar, Tindivanam Taluk Office, Tindivanam, Villupruram District.

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings in No.Na.Ka.A4/3380 /2020 dated 02/03/2021 passed by the 1st Respondent herein and quash the same and direct the 1st Respondent herein to appoint the petitioner as compassionate ground for the suitable post in the 2nd respondent within stipulated time maybe fixed by this Honourable Court.

For Petitioner(s): M.Senthilkumar For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, SGP

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the records.

2. The petitioner, by the present writ petition, assails the action of the respondent in issuing proceedings dated 03.02.2021, whereby the application submitted by the petitioner requesting for appointment on compassionate grounds to a suitable post with the 2nd respondent was rejected as having been submitted beyond three years from the date of death of the Government employee i.e., petitioner’s father, as being illegal and arbitrary.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that his father while working as a Village Assistant with the 2nd respondent had died in harness on 11.12.2007; that at the time of his death, the father was in regular service; and that the family consisted of his father, mother, two sisters, and himself. It is the further case of the petitioner that his father, during his lifetime, had contracted a second marriage, and through the second wife, had one son and a daughter, who are the half-siblings of the petitioner.

4. The petitioner contends that at the time of his father’s death, he was a minor, and his mother, being illiterate, did not submit any application seeking compassionate appointment, even though one of his sisters was 19 years of age.

5. The petitioner further contends that upon the death of his father, his half-brother one Mr.Satish, had approached the respondent authorities seeking appointment on compassionate grounds by submitting representation dated 31.12.2007; that the aforesaid request was rejected by the respondent authorities on the ground that, being a son through the second wife, he was ineligible for such an appointment; and that the petitioner, who was a minor at the relevant time, upon attaining the age of majority, approached the respondent authorities and submitted a representation dated 13.03.2019 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds, which was followed by another representation dated 24.10.2019.

6. It is further contended by the petitioner that, as the aforesaid representation for appointment on compassionate grounds did not yield any response, he had approached this Court by filing W.P. No. 1692 of 2020; that this Court by order dated 27.01.2020, directed the first respondent to consider the said representation within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; and that the petitioner was also permitted to submit application in an appropriate format. The petitioner contends that the 1st respondent thereafter issued the impugned order rejecting the request of the petitioner on the ground that the application was not submitted within a period of three years from the date of the death of the Government employee i.e., his father.

7. The petitioner contends that the ground on which the respondents have rejected his claim is wholly unjustified, as his half-brother had submitted an application for compassionate appointment within 20 days from the date of his father’s death; that the said applicatio