R BHARATHIAMMAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the arguments of Mr. PL. Narayanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. P. Wilson, learned Assistant Solicitor General representing the first respondent and have perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioners had filed the above O.A. seeking for compassionate appointment, which was denied by the first respondent by an order dated 08.5.2000. The first petitioner's husband N. Baskaran was working as Inspector in Customs and Central Excise Department at Kovilpatti and he died in harness on 12.11.1997. The first petitioner made an application to the Collector requesting for compassionate appointment to her son, who is the second petitioner. The request made by her was considered and also was rejected by the Additional Commissioner vide order dated 08.5.2000. In that, it was stated that the second petitioner cannot be granted appointment on compassionate ground as the family of the petitioners is getting two pensions and it also felt that the financial position does not warrant compassionate appointment. It was also stated that there is no vacancies available for considering compassionate appointment.

(3.) THE Tribunal, after accepting the stand of the respondents, found that the first petitioner herself was a Village Health Nurse and after retirement, she was also drawing pension and, therefore, the family is not in indigenous circumstances and the respondents have correctly rejected the request of the petitioner.