REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

M VELMURUGAN Appellant

V/S

CHIEF ENGINEER Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

CHIEF JUSTICE OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. L V A DIXITULU:V V S KRISHNAMURTHY [REFERRED TO]
SUSHMA GOSAIN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PHOOLWATI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UMESH KUMAR NAGPAL ANIL MALIK VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
UMESH KUMAR NAGPAL ANIL MALIK VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. BHAGWAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH PRASAD VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. HAKIM SINGH [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION SECONDARY VS. PUSHPENDRA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR,DEFENCE METAL RESEARCH LABORATORY V. G. MURALI [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MANIPUR VS. MOHAMMAD RAJAODIN [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HYDROELECTRIC POWER CORPN VS. NANAK CHAND [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PRAMOD GUPTA [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY VS. NIRAJ KUMAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. SOMVIR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ANJU JAIN [REFERRED TO]
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD VS. MADHUSUDAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. RAJKUMAR [REFERRED TO]
LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT VS. M SELVANAYAGAM ALIAS KUMARAVELU [REFERRED TO]
MGB GRAMIN BANK VS. CHAKRAWARTI SINGH [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYA UKARDA ATHOR (ATHAWALE) VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISIONS, TIRUCHIRAPALLI DISTRICT VS. P. MARIMUTHU [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of rejection dated 18.11.2008 issued by the second respondent, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner seeking compassionate appointment is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The father of the writ petitioner Late.S.Malairaj was employed as Road Inspector in the Office of the third respondent and passed away on 19.09.1995, while he was in service. At the time of the death of the deceased employee, the writ petitioner was a minor. Thus, the mother of the writ petitioner submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment on 001.1998, that itself was after a lapse of about 2+ years. The said application submitted by the mother of the writ petitioner had not been considered by the authorities within the reasonable period of time. The said petition was kept pending without passing any orders. In these circumstances, the writ petitioner, on attaining the age of majority, submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground on 27.06.2005. The said application was decided and the impugned order was passed in proceedings dated 18.11.2008, stating that the writ petitioner had not submitted an application within the period of three years from the date of death of the deceased employee.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner states that at the time of death of the deceased employee, the writ petitioner was a minor and could not in a position to submit any application. However, the mother of the writ petitioner had submitted an application seeking appointment. The delay occurred at the instance of the respondents and therefore, the writ petitioner cannot be blamed.

Click here to view full judgment.

M VELMURUGAN Vs. CHIEF ENGINEER

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address