R RAJAKRISHNA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the 3re respondent in SE.Mu.O.Mu.82916/J.3/97 dated 8.7.97 and that of the 1st respondent in Letter No,22247/N.I/82-4 dated 23.11.82 and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the respondents to provide the petitioner with suitable employment in any of the Government Department). The petitioner is the son of one Rajavel, who was working as HeadMaster of A.Ramalingapuram Panchayat Union Middle School belonging to Srivilliputhur block. He got himself medically discharged on 13.8.1996. At that time, the petitioner's father was 53 years old. The petitioner on the basis of the medical disqualification of his father applied for compassionate appointment.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner such of those of the employees, who got medical invalidated can be give compassionate appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.1025 Labour and Employment dated 22.11.1996. The petitioners recommendation was rejected by the third respondent, Director by communication dated 08.07.1997. It is stated in the said communication that by the Government letter dated 23.11.1982, the scheme for appointment will apply to those persons who are medically invalid before completion of 50 years of age. Since the petitioner's father was retired for medical invalidation at the age of 53, the grievance of the petitioner cannot be considered. This order was challenged before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No,9050 of 1997.

(3.) LEARNED counsel placed reliance upon the Judgment of the Supreme Court In Food Corporation of India And Another Vs. Ram Keshyadav And Another Reported In (2007) 9 SCC 531 in support of his argument. In that case, the fact situation which arose before the Supreme Court was, there was a conditional invalidation of the Government servant with a request for the compassionate appointment to the ward of the said servant and therefore, the Food Corporation of India having allowed to retire, the corresponding application to offer employment to the son of the employee was not granted. Therefore, the Supreme Court in the fact situation and also the scheme prevailing in Food Corporation of India granted a relief in that that case. This can be seen in paragraph 17 of the Judgment as extracted below: