##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01-10-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN WA No. 1948 of 2024 CNR: {HCMA010758972024}

A.Sureshkumar ..Appellant(s)

Vs

1. The Collector Vellore District.

2. The Tahsildar, K.V. Kuppam Taluk, Vellore District. ..Respondent(s)

PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order of dismissal of WP No.704 of 2024 dated 11.01.2024 and allow the appeal.

For Appellant(s): Mr.A.VISAGAN For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Rajesh, Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The writ order dated 11.01.2024, passed in WP No.704 of 2024 is under challenge.

2.The writ petitioner is the appellant. The father of the appellant one Mr.Annamalai was serving as Village Assistant and died on 02.02.2003 while he was in service. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the mother of the appellant submitted an application on 20.05.2005 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. However, the said application was not considered. WP No.3197 of 2014 came to be filed and it was dismissed by the High Court. Further writ petition was filed in WP No.704 of 2024 after a lapse of about 21 years from the date of death of the deceased employee. The said writ petition was also dismissed. Challenging the said order, the present writ appeal has been filed.

3.The learned Government Advocate would submit that the appellant is now over aged and moreso, the first writ petition filed in the year 2014 was dismissed. The second writ petition itself has been instituted after a lapse of 10 years from the date of dismissal of the first writ petition. Therefore, the present writ appeal is to be rejected.

4.Compassionate appointment is a concession and not a vested right.

Scheme is to be implemented strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated under the scheme. Long delay by itself is a ground to reject the application. An inference can be drawn that on account of efflux of time, the penurious circumstances that arose on account of the sudden death of the employee have vanished. That apart, the first writ petition filed in the year 2014 by the appellant was dismissed. That being the factum, this Court does not find any infirmity in the writ order impugned.

5.Consequently, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.)

01-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SLI To

1.The Collector Vellore District.

2.The Tahsildar, K.V. Kuppam Taluk, Vellore District.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J.

SLI

01-10-2026