INDUMATHY Vs. COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The request of petitioner for employment as a dependent under the dying in harness scheme was rejected by the Government as per Ext. P6 order. That order is under challenge in this original petition.

(2.) Petitioner's mother, a High School Assistant of a Government High School died in harness on 22-5-1967. Within three years on attaining majority petitioner presented an application for employment as a dependent in the prescribed form on 15-11-1985. Under the then Government G.O. dated 21-1-1970 the petitioner was not eligible for appointment since the Government Servant had not put in a minimum service of five years. Still petitioner had made the representation expecting a favourable order. A representation was thereafter made to the Chief Minister. By Ext. P2 order petitioner was informed that the claim is inadmissible as her mother had not put in the minimum service of five years. The G.O. dated 21-1-1970 was since then substituted by another G.O. dated 28-2-1986 wherein also the requirement of minimum service was retained. A further representation was therefore made to the Chief Minister as well as the Minister for Education. Petitioner was informed that the request cannot be considered then in view of the existing G.O. She was further informed that the Government was proposing to modify the existing order to rectify the anomalies and to extend the benefit to the relatives of Government employees who have completed probation. By G.O. dated 17-12-1987 the minimum qualifying service was relaxed to completion of period of probation or two years. Petitioner made a further request in the light of that G.O. But that request was turned down by Ext. P6 on the ground that the death in harness occurred before 1-7-1983 and the request cannot be granted in view of Para.17 of that G.O.

(3.) Challenging that order petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the order as well as a writ of mandamus directing respondents to pass appropriate orders appointing petitioner in accordance with Ext. P5 G.O. Since the filing of the petition additional ground (f) was also added in the original petition where under the provision in Clause.17 of the G.O. that the reduced period of service for eligibility of employment assistance shall be operative from 1-7-1983 is challenged as arbitrary and illegal. Petitioner seeks to strike down this condition incorporated in Clause.17 of Ext. P5 as violative of Art.14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.