N UMADEVI Vs. CHIEF ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to direct the respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation submitted by the writ petitioner dated 31.03.2014, in respect of grant of compassionate appointment.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner made a submission that the father of the writ petitioner late C.Nallathambi was employed as Office Assistant in the Office of the Divisional Engineer at Peravoorani in the Highways Department and due to the sudden heart attack, he passed away on 21.5.1989. However, the learned counsel urged this Court that the wife of the deceased employee was an illiterate woman and did not know the Government procedures in respect of the claim for compassionate appointment. Further, the learned counsel submitted that the writ petitioner was a minor at the time of the demise of the deceased employee. Thus, the writ petitioner could not submit any Application seeking compassionate appointment.

(3.) At the outset, the learned counsel pleads that the family of the writ petitioner was not aware of the benefits of the Scheme of compassionate appointment and therefore, they could not submit their Application seeking compassionate appointment,within a period of three years from the date of the death of the deceased employee. The Application at the first time was preferred by the writ petitioner only on 24.06.2014, after a lapse of about 25 years from the date of the death of the deceased employee. However, the Application has not been considered by the respondents and the same was kept pending without any progress. Thus, the writ petitioner was constrained to move this writ petition on 08.08.2014, with a prayer to consider and pass orders on the representation submitted by her on 31.03.2014.