R HARI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 28.3.2000 and for a direction to the respondents to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner commensurate with his qualification.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:- The father of the petitioner was employed in the Department of Agriculture. He had expired on 16.5.1984 in harness. The petitioner was aged about 5 years at that time. Subsequently the petitioner and his brother were brought up by their maternal grandmother with great financial hardship. After attaining majority, the petitioner applied to the second respondent on 21.9.1997 seeking appointment on compassionate ground. Ultimately such application was rejected under the impugned order on the ground that such application has been made after a lapse of 14 years from the date of death of the father.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. While not denying about the basic facts, it has been stated that the application had been filed after a lapse of 14 years and considering all the relevant circumstances, the proposal for relaxation has been rejected. The question of appointment on compassionate ground in respect of the dependants of the Government servant has been the subject matter of several Government Orders issued from time to time.