The prayer in this writ petition is for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the impugned order, dated 21.10.2010, passed in P.Mu.No.92484/J3/2009, by the first respondent, its consequential orders passed in Na.Ka.No.6647/A1/2010, dated 06.12.2010 and Na.Ka.No.1027/A1/2011, dated 24.02.2011, by the second respondent and to direct the respondents herein to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.
2. According to the petitioner, her mother was working as a Secondary Grade Teacher under the second respondent and she died on 17.05.1985 during the course of employment. Her father had married another woman and left the petitioner in lurch. With the support of her grandparents, she had completed her studies and Typewriting Course. Thus, with the higher secondary course along with typewriting course, she is qualified to be considered for the post of Junior Assistant.
3. The petitioner would further submit that on 10.04.1996, she had made an application to the second respondent seeking appointment to the post of Junior Assistant under compassionate ground. The second respondent appeared to have forwarded the petitioner's representation to the first respondent. The first respondent, vide proceedings in P.Mu.No.92484/J3/2009, dated 21.10.2010, rejected the petitioner's request on the ground that the petitioner had not applied within the prescribed period of three years and recommended the second respondent to reject the petitioner's request. Accordingly, the second respondent, vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.6647/A1/2010, dated 06.12.2010, rejected the petitioner's request on the ground of non-compliance of the Rules specified in G.O.Ms.No.202, dated 08.10.2007. Thereafter, once again she made an application before the Grievance Day Camp and by proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1027/A1/2011, dated 24.02.2011, the second respondent to whom the petitioner's application was forwarded, has rejected the petitioner's request on the ground that the application was not made within the period of three years as prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.120, dated 26.06.1995. Aggrieved by the rejection of her request, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a minor at the time of death of her mother and there was no support for her and her father had also married another woman and left the petitioner in lurch. Therefore, after completion of her studies and got qualified herself for appointment, she had made the application for appointment on compassionate ground.
5. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that application for compassionate appointment submitted on attainment of majority by a legal heir, who was minor at the time of death of the employee, has to be considered for grant of appointment and it could not be rejected on the ground of lapse of prescribed period and in support of his contentions, the learned counsel has placed reliance upon the decision in Mohanambal vs. Director, Land & Survey Department, reported in (2011) 2 MLJ 47.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the Government Letter No.8593/F.M.2/2000-11, dated 10.10.2006, stating that limitation period of three years is not applicable to the legal heirs of the deceased employee, who died on or before 26.06.1995. Admittedly, the petitioner's mother died on 17.05.1985 and it is the contention of the petitioner that her claim for appointment on compassionate ground shall be considered without insisting the limitation period.
7. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the unreported decision of this Court in Krishnaveni v. The Superintending Engineer, order dated 10.07.2013, passed in W.P.No.18660 of 2013, it is held that compassionate ground appointments shall be considered without any gender bias.
8. Heard both sides and perused the materials produced.
9. Admittedly, the petitioner's mother died, on 17.05.1985, while working as a Secondary Grade Teach under the second respondent and at that time, the petitioner was a minor and she was studying and therefore, it was not possible for her to seek appointment on compassionate ground. Therefore, after having qualified herself, she had submitted the application to the respondents. But, it was rejected on the ground time barred and non- compliance of certain rules. The Government vide Letter No. 8593/F.M.2/2000- 11, dated 10.10.2006, has stated that limitation period of three years is not applicable to the legal heirs of the deceased employee, who died on or before 26.06.1995, for applying for compassionate appointment. Further, the High Courts as well as the Supreme Court, in various decisions, have repeatedly held that application for compassionate appointment submitted on attainment of majority by a legal heir, who was a minor at the time of death of employee, has to be considered for grant of appointment and it should not be rejected on the ground of lapse of prescribed period.
10. In view of the foregoing discussions, a direction is issued to the respondents to reconsider the application made by the petitioner, on 10.04.1996, for appointment on compassionate ground and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner forthwith.
11. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
To:
1.The Joint Director, Department of School Education, Chennai-600 006.
2.District Educational Officer, District Education Office, Ramanathapuram..