K.Thangamiyili v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.07.2017 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM WRIT PETITION No. 17817 of 2017 K.Thangamiyili
...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal.
2. The Director of Town Panchayat, Kuralagam, 4th Floor, Chennai 600 108.
3. The Assistant Director, Town Panchayats (Salem & Namakkal District), Nattanmai Building, Salem-1.
4. The Executive Officer, Selection Grade, Town Panchayat, Namagiripet, Namakkal District.
...Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose petitioner of representation dated 30.08.2016 for considering the petitioner son K.Prabhakaran under compassionate Grounds for the deceased C.Kalisamy.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kolandasamy For RR1 to 3 : Mr.K.Dhanajeyam Special Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.J.H.Thiyam
O R D E R
The relief sought for in this writ petition is to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 30.08.2016 to
provide employment on compassionate grounds to the son of the writ petitioner.
2. The scheme of compassionate appointment is to grant appointment to the families of the Government servant, who died in service to mitigate the indigent circumstances. To get the benefits of this scheme of compassionate appointment, the legal heirs of the deceased Government employee has to prove that the family is in indigent circumstances and they are unable to lead their livelihood.
3. In the case on hand, the husband of the writ petitioner, Late.Kalisamy expired on 24.06.2005. However, the application seeking compassionate grounds was submitted on 30.08.2016, after a lapse of eleven years from the date of death of the deceased Government employee.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner contended that after the demise of the husband of the writ petitioner, there were certain civil litigations and in order to get final judgment in the civil litigations, and during the pendency, writ petitioner was unable to submit application seeking compassionate appointment. This cannot be a ground to consider the case of the writ petitioner for providing compassionate appointment.
5. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of T.Jothimalar Vs. the Principal District Judge, Cuddallore, rendered the judgment on 18.01.2017 in W.P.No.1207 of 2015 (myself S.M.Subramaniam.J, is also a party to the judgment ) wherein it is held as under:
"4. A Government servant is expected to give his full time attention and energy and render his very best of attention for securing faithful implementation of various schemes and welfare measures brought in place by the State Government, he is termed as a round the clock servant of the State and he should devote and dedicate himself for providing good quality services to the citizens.
Should, unfortunately, any such employee die in harness, his family members cannot be left behind in distressful conditions, unattended to and uncared for. With the sudden departure of a breadwinner, we should be alive to the fact that most of the Indian families lose the very source of their sustenance. It is not at all difficult for us to imagine that inspite of rapid strides of progress, the country has been making in all Sectors, still there are several lakhs of families having a single breadwinner and on an average 4 or 5 hungry persons depend on him for their sustenance and
survival. In such a scenario, if that breadwinner vanish suddenly, it is not at all difficult for us to visualise the harrowing plight to which the family would be reduced to overnight. His savings would be hardly enough to see them through the next couple of months, at best. During the best days of a man, he might have contributed meaningfully, given the fact that whatever marginally that would make a difference to the State Services and consequently the State Government would have earned the goodwill from its grateful citizens for the quality of services rendered to them.
5.Apart from the civil servant enjoying the status as such, upon his death, if his family members who are surviving are not to be taken care of by the State, the prospects are such that a negative image can be spread in the Society that the State never bothers for the well being of the dependents of the Government servants. It is to avoid any such negative image gaining ground, the State Government as a socio welfare measure, has put in place a mechanism for providing employment to one of the eligible dependents of the family of the deceased Government servant. Several meaningful conditions are attached to be complied with before hand for securing the benefit of the said scheme. The reason being that opportunities of public employment have to be thrown open to competition for one and all.
All members who are eligible to be so recruited should be permitted to compete and the best amongst them found suitable can alone get employment. Therefore, an exception is sought to be carved out from this constitutionally assured mechanism of filling up public employment while providing for making appointments on compassionate grounds. Possibly, conditions can be stipulated such as that at the time of death, the left over service of the deceased employee before he attains the age of superannuation should not be less than a reasonable period, say three years or at best five years.
Similarly, a stipulation that appointment on compassionate grounds should be claimed as quickly as possible after the death of the civil servant, a duration in this regard can be prescribed not to exceed by a reasonable length of time of say three years or at best five years.
interference can be drawn from that the family of the deceased civil servant is able to feed for itself, notwithstanding the loss of the breadwinner. The period of endurance of such a family holds out an assurance that the family has got over the trauma caused by the departure of the breadwinner, but, it has the social resources to carry on with the show in his absence as well.
6.In these set of circumstances, the State Government is certainly justified in directing that no claim for compassionate appointment should be entertained beyond a reasonable period of say three years or five years, as the case may be. If a family of the deceased civil servant can survive for long periods entirely on their own, it presupposes that the surviving members have the necessary wherewithal to survive, notwithstanding the departure of the breadwinner.
7.When we keep these factors in mind and also in view of the fact that making appointments on compassionate grounds is not one of the identified/marked sources of recruitment to civil service-- rather it is an exception to the normal constitutional norm of allowing all people to contest and compete-appointments on compassionate grounds cannot be made after long years gave gone by, from the date of the death of the civil servant."
6. In view of the legal Principles laid down in the above Division Bench judgment, the question of considering the grounds raised in this writ petition does not arise at all. In view of the fact that the application seeking compassionate appointment itself was submitted after a lapse of eleven years from the date of the death of the deceased husband of the writ petitioner, this Court is not inclined to consider the prayer sought for in this writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, no order as to cost.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar (J) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1. The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal.
2. The Director of Town Panchayat, Kuralagam, 4th Floor, Chennai 600 108.
3. The Assistant Director, Town Panchayats (Salem & Namakkal District), Nattanmai Building, Salem-1.
4. The Executive Officer, Selection Grade, Town Panchayat, Namagiripet, Namakkal District.
+ 1 cc to M/s.S.Kolaindasamy, Advocate,SR.49169 + 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, SR.49714 W.P.No.17817 of 2017 SJ(CO) NR 09/08/2017