R.GEETHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner/party -in - person seeks to quash the impugned order dated 18.06.2014 passed by the third respondent / the General Manager (HR), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chennai, in and by which the request of the petitioner seeking re - employment to her son/Mr.R.Ravi was rejected on the ground that an employee who resigned from the services of the Corporation will not be considered for re -employment as per the policy conditions of the respondent Corporation.

(2.) Mr.K.Venkataramani, learner Senior counsel was appointed as amicus curiae on 04.02.2016 to assist this Court on behalf of the petitioner / party -in -person. Subsequently, the learned Senior counsel was relieved on 04.03.2016 on his request.

(3.) The petitioner's husband Mr.E.R.Ragupathy, who was appointed as Typist/Clerk by the respondent Corporation, died on 21.06.1995 after rendering 29 years of unblemished service, leaving behind the petitioner, three sons and a daughter, of which the last two children are physically handicapped from their birth with 90% and 80% disability respectively. After the demise of the petitioner's husband, the respondents, through their letter dated 23.06.1995, offered her two options under the scheme for rehabilitation of the family of the employee who died while in service. The first one was to join the Post -Retirement Medical Attendance Facility on a one time payment of Rs.698/ - for self and the dependent children and that another one was that employment to her dependant son or daughter eligible for service. Out of three options available under the Scheme, the petitioner had chosen option No.3 i.e. employment to her dependant son -Mr.R.Ravi and accordingly, her second son Mr.R.Ravi was provided employment as Typist/Clerk based on his qualification at the Southern Regional office, Chennai, on 18.01.1996. However, due to sudden tragic circumstances, her eldest son Mr.Mohan, who was working in Sundaram Finance Limited, passed away on 26.09.1999, therefore, due to sudden demise, the petitioner along with her second son Mr.R.Ravi were forced to attend to the needs of the other two handicapped children for bathing, clothing, taking food, timely medicine, etc., therefore, in view of such compelling circumstances, the petitioner's second son Mr.R.Ravi, after 4 years of service in the respondent Corporation, tendered his resignation on 27.12.1999 and the same was also accepted by the respondent Corporation with effect from 27.12.1999. However, after the resignation from service, they were unable to meet out the medical expenses of the two handicapped children as well as the petitioner, hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 01.06.2014 requesting the respondent Corporation to reinstate her second son in the services of the respondent Corporation. However, the said request of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that as per policy conditions of the respondent Corporation, an employee, who resigned from the services of the Corporation, will not be considered for re -employment under any circumstances and again it has rejected the further request of Post Retirement Medical assistance for self.