IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI A.Sivaganesh Petitioner Vs

1. II 522 Seppakkam Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society, Represented by its President/Secretary, Cheppakam Post, Veppur Taluk, Cuddalore District.

2.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society Office of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Virudhachalam District.

3.Joint Registrar Zone, Office of the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Cuddalore District.

4.Revenue Regional Officer Office of the District Collector, Veppur. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent of the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings bearing Na.Ka.165/2023 Tho.Ve.Sa(1)

dated 09.02.2024 and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner seeking the appointment on compassionate grounds in pursuance the death of the father of the petitioner who died on 30.03.2023 within a time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr. G. Ilamurugu For Respondents: Mr.R.Murthy Govt. Advocate

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the 2^nd respondent in Na.Ka.165/2023 Tho.Ve.Sa(1) dated 09.02.2024, whereby the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected on the ground that the petitioner's father was not a regular Government servant at the time of his demise as well as sought consequential directions to the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner for appointment.

2. It is the case of the petitioner is that his father was working as Salesman in a Fair Price Shop under the 1^st respondent from 08.04.2000. He continued in service and died in harness on 30.03.2023, leaving behind his legal heirs including the petitioner. According to the petitioner, immediately after the demise of his father, representations were submitted to the 1^st respondent on 17.04.2023 and to the 4^th respondent on 19.04.2023 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. It is stated that the 1^st respondent forwarded a positive proposal to the 3^rd respondent on 31.08.2023. However, the petitioner was informed that there was no vacancy in the concerned post and that he would be considered in another society under transit basis. Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent, by the impugned order dated 09.02.2024, rejected his request on the ground that his father’s services had not been regularised and that he was only a temporary employee, and therefore he was not eligible for compassionate appointment. Challenging the rejection order dated 09.02.2024 issued by the 2^nd respondent, this writ petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is arbitrary and contrary to the Circular issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in Circular No.7/2021 dated 09.09.2021. He submitted his further arguments by placing reliance on the said Circular and the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.21440 of 2015 dated 19.02.2021 and clarification order dated 22.04.2021, he contended that the benefit of compassionate appointment was extended even to those employees appointed in Co-operative Societies during the period from 08.07.1980 to 12.03.2001 whose appointments were irregular and whose services were not regularised.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that non-regularisation was not attributable to the employee and the respondents ought to have regularised the petitioner's father and extended the benefit. It is the argument that though the petitioner’s father put much efforts for regularisation, it was not done so. He vehemently argued that since petitioner’s father had been continuously working from the year 2000 till his death in 2023, the respondents ought to have treated him as a regular employee and consequently extended the benefit of compassionate appointment. Also, he ar