Saranya, v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:19.01.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.11937 of 2020 Saranya ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Commissioner,

2. The Executive Officer, ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's application in file No.4605/2015/A1 dated 06.06.2016 without offering any consent letter from other legal heirs and provide a job under compassionate ground to the petitioner within time fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravana Kumar For Respondents : Mrs.L.P.Maurya, Standing counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's application in file No.4605/2015/A1 dated 06.06.2016 and provide a job under compassionate ground to the petitioner.

2. Mrs.L.P.Maurya, learned Standing counsel, learned Government Advocate takes notice. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the employee of the respondent Municipality, who is the father of the petitioner, died on 26.10.2015, leaving behind him five family members as legal heirs. The petitioner is a married person, having two children and due to financial crisis, the petitioner is claiming job under compassionate ground on account of the demise of his father. Except the petitioner, no other legal heirs have made any application to get job under compassionate ground. Hence, she made a representation to the respondents on 03.06.2016, which was received by them on 06.06.2016. Since there is no response from the respondents on her representation, she has preferred this writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's father died on 26.10.2015 and the petitioner has made an application within a period of three years from the date of death of her father.

5. The counsel for the respondents would submit that some of the documents need to be scrutinized for the purpose of considering the request of the petitioner and that the petitioner has not produced the same.

6. In reply, it is stated by the petitioner that she is willing to produce the documents sought for by the petitioner.

7. In view of the submission made by the petitioner, the petitioner is expected to produce all the documents sought for by the respondents within a period of 30 days from today and on such production, a decision shall be taken by the respondents within 60 days thereafter and the decision taken shall be immediately communicated to the petitioner.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vum To

1. The Commissioner,

2. The Executive Officer, +1cc to Mr.Saravanakumar, Advocate SR.2279 W.P.No.11937 of 2020 MG(CO) CB(11/02/2021)