(1.) The order of rejection dtd. 18/3/2013 rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) The petitioner states that her father Mr.P.Ramanujam was working as Head Master in the 6th respondent school and died on 25/9/1997, while he was in service. The petitioner was a minor at the time of death of her father, her mother submitted an application on 11/9/2000 seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The said application was not considered by the authorities as the petitioner was minor and not eligible for employment. The petitioner had submitted an application on attaining the age of majority and admittedly after a lapse of 3 years from the date of death of her father. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the mother of the petitioner made an application within a period of three years. However, the mother has not sought for appointment and the application was submitted to provide appointment to the petitioner.
(3.) Admittedly, the petitioner was not eligible during the relevant point of time and after attaining the majority, she approached the authorities for providing the appointment. The authorities had rejected the application through the impugned order dtd. 18/3/2013 stating that the petitioner got married and she is residing separately along with her husband. That apart, the mother of the petitioner was receiving the family pension of about Rs.1,25,000.00 per year. There is no legal heir to the deceased employee. It is contended that out of 2 legal heirs, the writ petitioner got married and settled along with her husband and the mother of the writ petitioner was receiving the family pension and therefore the authorities are of the opinion that the family was not in indigent circumstances and consequently, the claim for appointment was rejected.