IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 17.02.2026 Pronounced on : 20.02.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.23880 of 2021 R.Vairamuthu ... Petitioner vs

1. The Divisional Engineer, Highway Department of Constructions and Maintenance, Dharmapuri District.

2. The Assistant Divisional Manager, Highway Department of Constructions and Maintenance, Harur, Dharmapuri District. … Respondents Prayer: Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records from the second respondent pertaining to the impugned order Na.Ka.No.05/2021/E.Ni.Hu/on 22.07.2021 quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to provide compassionate appointment and pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mrs.P.Makeswari for Mr.P.Vijendran For Respondents : Mrs.V.Yamunadevi Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

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

2. Briefly put the case of the petitioner is that his father had worked as Road mender with the respondents; that his father had rendered 14 years of service with the second respondent; that his father while on duty had died in an accident which had occurred on 27.12.2011.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that his mother had predeceased his father in the year 2003; that his father thereafter married his mother's sister; and that due to the said wedlock, he had half-sister; and that the petitioner has elder sister and younger brother in addition to half-sister; and that the petitioner has elder sister and younger brother in addition to half-sister and all of them were living together with the father and step-mother.

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that on account of sudden death of his father in an accident on 27.12.2011, the entire family was left with no means; that during the year 2014, his elder sister who had attained the age of majority submitted her representation to the Principal Director of Highway Department, Chennai on 08.12.2014 seeking for appointment on compassionate ground; that in response to the aforesaid representation, the second respondent had given a reply on 10.02.2015 directing the petitioner's elder sister to produce required documents; that instead of the petitioner's elder sister submitted the additional documents as sought for by the second respondent in person, there has been no response from the respondents; that on approaching the respondents, his sister was informed to wait for some time; and that in the interregnum, his elder sister got married in the year 2018.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that thereafter, he had approached the second respondent and submitted a representation dated 13.01.2018 seeking for appointment on compassionate ground along with all the required documents; and that the second respondent forwarded the said representation to the first respondent on 29.03.2021; that on the second respondent enquiring about the representation submitted by his elder sister for appointment on compassionate ground, earlier he had obtained no objection letter from his sister and other family members and submitted the same to the second respondent on 06.11.2019; and that instead of submitting the application along with the relevant document and also no objection certificate from his elder sister and other family members, the respondents did not consider the case of petitioner for being provided with compassionate appointment.

6. Petitioner contended that the respondents, instead of providing compassionate appointment, on the other hand placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 23.01.2020 issued, are claiming that since, the application for appointment on compassionate ground is not made within three years from the date of death of his father, the representation cannot be considered which action of the respondents it is contended as