O SAMUEL ARMSTRONG Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INITIALLY, the petitioner had filed O. A. No. 2503/2003 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal challenging the order of the Government dated 2. 12. 2002 issued in Govt. Lr. No. 36789/g/2000, Health and Family Welfare Department and the same has been transferred to the file of this Court and renumbered as W. P. No. 36701 of 2005.

(2.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioners father was a leprosy patient and he got cured of the disease. The petitioners mother was also a leprosy patient. The petitioners father died on 29. 10. 1980 while working as a Higher Grade Teacher in the Special School attached to Government Leprosy Sanatorium, Yethapur, Salem District. At the time of his fathers death, the petitioner was 10 years old. The petitioner, who was also a leprosy patient by birth was hospitalized for a long time. Though the mother was working as a Secondary Grade Teacher, Government Leprosy Sanatorium School, Yethapur, she did not care to look after the petitioner, who was hospitalized and the petitioner had incurred huge expenses for his treatment by raising loans from private sources. The petitioners mother retired from service on 31. 10. 1996. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was undergoing treatment from 1987 to 1991 in the Government Leprosy Sanatorium, Yethapur and again in 1996 and he was completely cured and in March, 1997, a certificate was issued that no gross deformity appeared except mild deformity and that the same would not affect him from performing Government jobs. In the year 1998, the petitioner submitted an application dated 4. 3. 1998 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. But, the same was rejected by the letter of the Director of Medical and Rural Health Services dated 5. 7. 99 on the ground that since the mother of the petitioner was in Government Service at the time of his fathers death, he is not eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds. After getting cured, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 25. 6. 2001 seeking appointment under the scheme of appointment for cured leprosy patients. But, the same was also rejected by Government Letter dated 6. 3. 2002 informing the petitioner that by G. O. Ms. No. 296 Health and Family Welfare Department dated 17. 6. 97, the said scheme was abolished. Subsequent to this, again, the petitioner submitted another representation dated 10. 4. 2002 in this regard and the same was rejected by the impugned order dated 2. 12. 2002. Challenging the same, the above W. P. /o. A. has been filed.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioners request for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected on the ground that his mother was in Government service at the time of his fathers death. But, as per G. O. Ms. No. 155 Labour and Employment Department dated 16. 7. 93, even if one member of the concerned family is in employment, the other member is eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds, provided the earning member does not lend any support to the family. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the petitioners mother was working as a Secondary Grade Assistant, she did not lend any support to the petitioner and the petitioner was left in the lurch. Hence, as per the above said G. O. , according to the learned counsel, the petitioner is eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds and this aspect has not been considered by the Government. That apart, according to the learned counsel, the object of the said Government order is to help the legal heirs of the Government Servants, who died while in service. The learned counsel further contended that the petitioner is a cured leprosy patient and he is not able to get a job in spite of the fact that it has been medically declared that he is fit for appointment in Government Service.