REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

KISHORE KUMAR Appellant

V/S

Commissioner Commercial Tax Department Ezhilaham 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 relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner for a suitable post on compassionate grounds.

(2.) The father of the writ petitioner was employed as Assistant Commissioner Tax Officer and passed away on 14.04.2005 while he was in service. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner is the first wife's son of the deceased employee. The mother of the writ petitioner was also passed away. The second wife of the deceased employee Angammal is settled very well and her son is employed in the United States of America and earning sufficiently. However, the application seeking compassionate appointment was preferred by the writ petitioner in the year 2005 itself and the same was not considered by the respondents. The grievances of the writ petitioner is that inspite of the fact that he is eligible for appointment of compassionate appointment grounds, the case was not considered without any valid reason.

(3.) The learned special government pleader opposes the contention by stating that the writ petitioner, now after the lapse of many years cannot claim compassionate appointment and further the writ petitioner is now aged about 44 years and already over aged. This being the factum, the scheme of compassionate appointment cannot be provided to the writ petitioner.

Click here to view full judgment.

KISHORE KUMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT EZHILAHAM

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address