SHIBIN MOHANDAS PUTHUVAYALIL, THAZHATHUVADAKARA Vs. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT RMS TV DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The compassionate appointment sought for vide O.A. No. 1135 of 2014 filed by the applicant wherein interference has been declined by the Tribunal as per Ext. P3 is the subject matter of challenge at the instance of the applicant.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Asst. Solicitor General for the respondents.

(3.) The sequence of events revealed from the proceedings is that the mother of the petitioner was working as TBOP SA at the RMS. While serving the Department as above, she bid farewell to this world on 03.02.2007. Ext.A1 is the death certificate issued and it is stated that there was some mistake in the name shown, which had been corrected only in the year 2012. Annexure A2 is the application dated 06.08.2012 submitted seeking for compassionate appointment, which was considered by the Circle Relaxation Committee and as per Annexure A3 dated 29.01.2014, rejection of the same was intimated to the petitioner mainly for the reason that the petitioner was a married person at the time of submitting the application and hence he was not coming within the purview of the scheme. This made the petitioner to challenge the same by filing O.A. before the Tribunal. The rejection was mainly on the ground of delay, in so far as the application was made only in the year 2012; whereas the death occurred was in the year 2007. The marital status of the petitioner was the other ground forming the basis for rejection of the claim as per Annexure A3. The petitioner submitted Annexure A4 representation on 30.04.2014 to have the matter re-considered, which however did not turn to be fruitful and this made him to approach the Tribunal as mentioned above.