Lalitha v. The Conservator Of Forest

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Lalitha ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Conservator of Forest, Kumarasamipatti, Salem - 636 007.

2. The District Forest Officer, Collectorate Campus, Tiruchengode Road, Namakkal District, Namakkal - 637 003.

3. Meena ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to not grant the appointment of the petitioner's deceased son V.Raghunanthan job on compassionate grounds and not to disburse the monetary benefits, to the third respondent herein, based upon the petitioner's representations cum objections dated 04.12.2023 and 26.05.2025.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Parameshwaran For Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj, Government Advocate (for R1 & R2) *****

O R D E R

The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a mandamus to direct the respondents not to grant the appointment of the deceased petitioner's son, viz., V. Raghunanthan, on compassionate grounds and not to disburse the monetary benefits to the third respondent herein, based upon the petitioner's representations cum objections dated 04.12.2023 and 26.05.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that originally the petitioner's husband, viz., Vijayaraj, was serving as a Security in the Forest Department. Subsequently, while he was in service, he died during 2005. On the death of the petitioner's husband, his second son, viz., V.Raghunanthan, was appointed on compassionate grounds. Unfortunately, he also died during 2023 while he was in service. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the death of her son was only due to the harassment of his wife qua the third respondent. Hence, the petitioner, 2/5

being a mother, submits that any terminal benefits of her son should not be disbursed to the third respondent unless she gives a no objection. In this connection, the petitioner sent representations dated 04.12.2023 and 26.05.2024.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first and second respondents and perused the materials available on record.

4. While perusing the submissions of the petitioner, the representation seems to be the result of personal turmoil and personal grudges between the petitioner and the third respondent. In which they cannot make the official as party to that. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition.

3/5

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the Official respondents are directed to act in accordance with law. No costs. 20.06.2025 kv Index : Yes/No Speaking order /Non Speaking Order To

1. The Conservator of Forest, Kumarasamipatti, Salem - 636 007.

2. The District Forest Officer, Collectorate Campus, Tiruchengode Road, Namakkal District, Namakkal - 637 003.

4/5

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

kv 20.06.2025 5/5