← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/2684/2017disposed of

T.Meenakshi v. The Managing Director

2019-03-14Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.03.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.2684 of 2017 T.Meenakshi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporation, Pallavan Street, Chennai - 2.

2.The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation, Pallavan Street, Chennai - 2.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide an employment to the petitioner's son, T.Palani Ganesan, on compassionate ground instead of the petitioner as per the order in W.P.No.11081 of 2009, dated 21.09.2011. For Petitioner :

Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents :

Mr.K.Sathya Singh

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to provide employment to the petitioner's son on compassionate ground, as per the order in W.P.No.11081 of 2009, dated 21.09.2011.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3.The case of the petitioner is that her husband was employed as a Driver in the State Express Transport Corporation on 02.11.1998 and he was discharged from service on 24.01.2001 on medical disability. On 07.02.2001, the petitioner's husband made a representation to provide an alternative employment, but he passed away on 08.08.2003. Hence, seeking compassionate appointment, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.11081 of 2009, wherein, this Court, by order, dated 21.09.2011, directed the third respondent therein to consider the claim of the petitioner on compassionate appointment.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The grievance of the petitioner is that even right from the order, dated 21.09.2011, the respondents have not taken any steps to provide any employment to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner sent a representation to the respondents on 15.09.2016, to provide employment to her son, on compassionate ground, instead of the petitioner, as per the order in W.P.No.11081 of 2009, dated 21.09.2011. Since the same has not been considered so far, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the representation of the petitioner would be considered on merits.

6.In view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, directs the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 15.09.2016 seeking compassionate appointment to her son, in the light of the order passed in W.P.No.11081 of 2009, dated 21.09.2011 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To 1.The Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporation, Pallavan Street, Chennai - 2.

2.The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation, Pallavan Street, Chennai - 2.

+1 CC to M/s.K.SATHIYA SINGH, Advocate in SR-53899 +1 CC to M/s.V.RAGHAVACHARI, Advocate in SR-54175 W.P(MD)No.2684 of 2017 14.03.2019 ps PK/16.04.2019 : 2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/