Madras High Court
E.Yasodha vs The Superintending Engineer on 20 January, 2016
Author: D.Hariparanthaman
Bench: D.Hariparanthaman
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 20.01.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
Writ Petition(MD)No.1099 of 2016
E.YASODHA ... PETITIONER
Vs.
THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
TANGEDCO,
TIRUNELVELI ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CIRCLE,
TIRUNELVELI. ... RESPONDENT
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, call for the records of the
impugned order of the respondent in
Ka.No.014372/253/Ni/Aa/Ni.P.3/U.3/Ko.Va.Velai/2015 dated 19-06-15 and quash
the same and further direct the respondent to provide petitioner's employment
on compassionate ground.
!For Petitioner : Mr.H.Arumugam
^For Respondent : Mr.C.Kasinathadurai
:ORDER
Since the matter is covered by a judgment of this Court dated 16.12.2015 in W.A(MD)No.1400 of 2011(S.Velraj vs. Superintending Engineer, Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle, Tirunelveli and the Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai), the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.
2.The petitioner is the eldest daughter of one Esakki, who was working as a Commercial Inspector in the respondent Board and died in harness on 19.06.2004. At the time of death, the petitioner was aged about 13 years. On attaining majority, she applied for compassionate appointment. However, the same was rejected by the impugned order dated 19.06.2015 on the ground that the application had been filed beyond three years.
3.This writ petition is against the aforesaid order dated 19.06.2015 passed by the respondent.
4.It is admitted fact that the employee died on 19.06.2004, leaving behind his wife, two daughters and one son and at that time, the petitioner who is the eldest daughter, aged about 13 years. If she applied for appointment on compassionate ground at that time, when she was 13 years, her application would have been rejected on the ground that she was a minor and, therefore, on attaining majority, the petitioner rightly applied for appointment on compassionate ground. However, taking into consideration the plight of the family and also the young age of the mother and other children, I am of the view that it is a fit case where appointment on compassionate ground has to be given. Three years limitation cannot be applied in strait- jacket formula and each and every case has to be approached differently, based on the facts as held by the Division Bench in W.A(MD)1400/2011. Since the eldest daughter of the family has rightly applied for appointment on compassionate ground, on attaining majority, the respondent has to consider the petitioner's application for appointment on compassionate ground.
5.In view of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh disposal, in the light of the observations made above. Such exercise shall be completed, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
To THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, TANGEDCO, TIRUNELVELI ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CIRCLE, TIRUNELVELI..