Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The son of the deceased Government employee challenges the order of rejection of compassionate appointment in the proceedings of the first respondent/District Collector in Na.Ka.No.2613/2007/PA/AA1, dated 2.1.2008, seeking to quash the same and for a consequential direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds.

2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:

(a) The petitioner's father Vadivel was employed as a Class IV employee in Tiruvannamalai Panchayat Union Office, and he died in harness on 2.10.1995, leaving behind his wife--Smt.Boopathy, two sons--Saravanan and Sampath (writ petitioner) and one daughter--Vasanthi. His father was the sole bread winner of the family and they have no other source of income. On the sudden demise of the petitioner's father, the family was forced to stand on the streets.
(b) After the death of the petitioner's father, the petitioner applied for a Legal Heirship certificate, but the Village Administrative Officer (for short, 'the VAO') of Mettu Kosalai Village, without issuing the heirship certificate of his deceased father Vadivel, tried to project as if the said Vadivel was married to one Laxmi and as such, the said Laxmi was the widow of the said deceased Vadivel and fabricated documents to show as the heirs of the deceased Vadivel.
(c) While that being the position, the petitioner's mother filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.No.1188 of 1996 for a direction to the respondents to issue the Legal Heirship Certificate and this Court directed the respondents therein to consider the representation of the petitioner therein and pass orders. However, the Tahsildar, Tiruvannamalai, passed the order on 22.5.1996, directing the petitioner to get the orders from the Civil Court by obtaining a succession certificate.
(d) Therefore, the petitioner and the other heirs of the deceased Vadivel filed a civil suit in O.S.No.5555 of 1999 before the 18th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai for a declaration that the plaintiffs are the heirs of the deceased Vadivel and also for a consequential direction that the plaintiffs (legal heirs of the deceased Vadivel) are entitled to get the terminal benefits arising out of the death of Vadivel. Pending the suit suit, the alleged wife of the deceased Vadivel, namely Lakshmi, the Village Administrative Officer, Mettukosalai Village, Tiruvannamalai, Secretary of the Local Administration Department, Chennai, Paramasivam and the Executive Officer of Thiruvannamalai Panchayat Union, were impleaded as parties to the said suit. All the parties have filed their pleadings and contested the case for trial and let in oral and documentary evidence. After the contested trial, the learned 18th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, granted a decree as prayed for on 4.4.2005 and declared the plaintiffs (one of the sons, Sampath--writ petitioner herein, Boopathy--wife of the deceased Vadivel, Saravanan--another son of the deceased Vadivel and Vasanthi--the daughter of the deceased Vadivel) as the heirs of the deceased Vadivel and also held that the plaintiffs are entitled to get the terminal benefits on the death of Vadivel.

4. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit, inter-alia stating as follows:

(i) The petitioner Thiru.V.Sampath who is the son of late Thiru.Vadivel, who was working as Gang Coolie in Tiruvannamalai Panchayat Union Office, died on 2.10.1995 while in service. The family of the deceased employee included his wife Tmt.Bhoopathy, daughter--Tmt.Vasanthi, sons--Saravanan and Sampath (writ petitioner).
(ii) The petitioner being one of the heirs of the deceased employee submitted application for appointment on compassionate grounds belatedly on 14.2.2007 to the Block Development Officer (for short, 'the BDO'), Tiruvannamalai, and after scrutinising the relevant documents, the proposal for compassionate grounds appointment was forwarded to the Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, in the office letter No.2613/2007/PA4, dated 28.5.2007 for orders.