Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

The Director Of School Education vs S.Revathi on 15 July, 2016

Author: Huluvadi G. Ramesh

Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh, M.V.Muralidaran

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:   15.7.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN

W.A.No.833 of 2016
and
C.M.P.No.10745 of 2016

1. The Director of School Education,
   College Road, Chennai 600 006.

2. The District Education Officer,
   Vellore, Vellore District. 						Appellants

Versus

S.Revathi									Respondent

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 14.7.2015 passed in W.P.No.21047 of 2015 on the file of this court.

		For appellants 	: Mr.K.Karthikeyan, Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants.

2. The writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.No.21047 of 2015 granting the relief of compassionate appointment to the respondent herein.

3. The respondent herein, who claims to be a diploma holder in Civil Engineering and Construction Management, Autocad and also in Clients Server Technology, sought for appointment on compassionate grounds since her mother died in service. Since her request was rejected by the appellants, she had filed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge, relying upon G.O.Ms.No.165, Labour & Employment Department dated 30.8.2010, set aside the impugned order and directed the appellants to provide appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground. Challenging the same, the present writ appeal has been filed.

4. The stand of the learned Government Advocate is that in furtherance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, a personal enquiry was conducted with regard to the family situation of the petitioner and it was found out that the father of the petitioner is also a pensioner and therefore, it is contended that the family of the petitioner is not suffering financially due to the death of her mother in harness and hence, she is not entitled to appointment on compassionate ground.

5. In the instant case, the mother of the petitioner died in service. According to the petitioner, she died in harness and the pension of the father of the petitioner who retired from service is only meagre. It appears that the learned Single Judge, having examined these factors, directed the appellants to provide employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.


									(H.G.R.,J.)(M.V.M.,J.)
Index:Yes/No 								15.7.2016         
Internet:Yes/No
ssk.




HULUVADI G. RAMESH, J.
AND                    
M.V.MURALIDARAN, J.     



ssk.












W.A.No.833 of 2016







15.7.2016.