LAWS(MAD)-2019-11-984

P.SENTHIL KUMAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CUDDALORE DISTRICT

Decided On November 25, 2019
P.Senthil Kumar Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CUDDALORE DISTRICT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal questions the correctness of the impugned judgment dated 6.3.2019, whereunder the learned Single Judge has held that the appellant's claim for compassionate appointment cannot be considered in the background that his father died on 26.1.1993 and the application submitted by the mother of the appellant in 1994 was not considered, whereafter the appellant had no right to claim this appointment inasmuch as, if the mother was alive, the appellant's claim in the year 2007 is hit by laches.

(2.) The background of the dispute is that the appellant's father late Periyasamy was working as a Village Assistant, which post has been described as a Village Guard in terms of the Tamil Nadu Village Servants Service Rules, 1980 (for brevity, "the 1980 Rules"). The appointment order of the deceased employee indicates that he had been appointed against a permanent vacancy by the Tahsildar, Tittakkudi, on 8.4.1986. He had died, admittedly, in 1993. The application for compassionate appointment is stated to have been moved by the widow of the employee, namely, the mother of the appellant, in the year 1994.

(3.) The appellant moved a representation for appointment, but the same was not considered and he was informed that no such application was pending before the Collector. However, a memorandum was issued on 21.7.2016 on behalf of the District Collector, Cuddalore, that since the appellant's father was a temporary Village employee, compassionate appointment could not be offered to the appellant. The request for compassionate appointment was, therefore, rejected.