G. VIJAYA PRASANNA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case as narrated by the petitioner in brief are as follows:

(2.) Mr.C.Samivel, learned counsel for the writ petitioner would contend that this is a case of the death of the petitioner's father in December 2003 and the original request for the compassionate appointment and that the petitioner being a physically challenged person with his mother getting a negligible amount of Rs.5,770/- as family pension, it was getting very difficult for them to make both ends meet. His further contention is that for 7 years since 2004, he was given employment as an office assistant under the contract system and thereafter only in December 2014 he was asked to submit a complete application in the prescribed format and that the application for compassionate appointment was rejected by the third respondent vide their letter dated 01.06.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner approached Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in OA.No.1216 of 2018 against this order of rejection by the third respondent. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench also dismissed the Original Application concurring with the third respondent's order.

(3.) The respondents have not disputed the fact that originally the application for compassionate appointment was submitted in 2004 (12.05.2004). That the application was not complete in terms of the annexed documents is also found to be true as per the reply statement of the respondents in the OA.No.1216 of 2018 before Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench. The relevant extract reads as under: