Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J
S.Shahana – Appellant
Versus
Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of mother's death and repeated compassionate applications rejected. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's timely application; respondents cite delay and age. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. regulations impose no minimum age at application; only post-appointment. (Para 5 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. first application timely; rejections unsustainable. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. orders quashed; direct compassionate appointment. (Para 14) |
ORDER
Heard Ms.H.Jasima Yasmin, learned Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates for petitioner and Mr.B.Ramanathan learned Standing Counsel for respondent Board.
2. The mother of the petitioner was employed as Technical Assistant in the respondent Board and while working as such at Palani, she passed away on 27.01.2018 due to health reasons. Thereafter, the petitioner sought for compassionate appointment by submitting her application on 04.08.2020. However, the said application was not considered positively by the 3rd respondent on the ground that the terminal benefits of her deceased mother are not yet settled and required the petitioner to submit an application for compassionate appointment, only after approval of the terminal benefits. The terminal benefit of the deceased moth
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
