S.SELVAKUMAR Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of rejection, dated 08.09.2014, passed by the respondent, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, on the ground that the writ petitioner was a minor during the relevant point of time, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner states that the father of the writ petitioner was employed as Foreman Grade-I in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and died on 25.04.2008, while he was in service. The mother of the writ petitioner submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds to the writ petitioner on 20.04.2011. The said application was rejected by the authorities competent, on the ground that the writ petitioner was minor during the relevant point of time. Thereafter, once again, an application was filed on 25.07.2014, after the writ petitioner attaining the age of majority. The said application was also rejected, on the ground that applications submitted after a lapse of three years from the date of the death of the employee cannot be entertained. Relying on the Board proceedings, the impugned order states that if the legal heirs of the deceased employee are minors while applying for appointment on compassionate grounds, then they are not entitled to submit application, after a lapse of three years from the date of the death of the employee. On this ground, the claim of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected.

(3.) The counter affidavit filed by the respondents states that the first application submitted during the year 2011 was rejected on the ground that the writ petitioner was a minor. The second application, dated 25.07.2014, was also rejected on the ground that the application was not submitted within the prescribed period of three years from the date of the death of the employee and therefore, the same cannot be entertained as per the Board proceedings in B.P.Ms(FB) No.46 (Adm.Br), dated 13.10.1995. The respondent, in support of his contentions, relied upon the decision of the Honourable Division Bench of this Court in the case of the Inspector General of Prisons, Tiruchirapalli District and another vs. P.Marimuthu , reported 2016 (5) CTC 125.