M.Subash v. The Managing Director

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 15/06/2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR M.Subash ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Ltd., Thanjavur District..

2. The General Manager, Tamilnadu Trnasport Corporation, Kumbakonam Ltd., Perambalur Branch, Perambalur District.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant an appointment the petitioner on compassionate grounds based on the petitioner's application dated 30.05.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh 1/5

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds based on his application dated 30.05.2026.

2. The petitioner herein claims to be the son of one Mr.Mathalairaj, who is said to have served as the Driver and Senior Driver in the respondent Corporation from 21.04.2001 till 30.10.2014, the day on which he passed away due to ill health. Consequent upon the demise of the petitioner's father, it appears certain disputes arose between the first wife and the second wife of the deceased employee and the same was resolved before a Lok Adalat through settlement on 26.06.2022.

2. It was thereafter on 30.05.2026, the petitioner claims to have submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment. From the above, it is evident that the petitioner has for the first time submitted an application for compassionate appointment about twelve years after the demise of his father and four years after the so-called settlement before 2/5

the Lok Adalat. The period of the delay with which the application has submitted for compassionate appointment itself shows that the same is only an afterthought and the petitioner or any of family members of the deceased employee are not in actual need of compassionate appointment. If at all, they are in need of a compassionate appointment and have no other source to survive, the petitioner would have submitted his application immediately after the demise of his father in the year 2014. In the absence of any application having been submitted immediately after the demise of the employee, the ground for the delay as the dispute between the first wife and second wife cannot be accepted.

3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has approached the respondent corporation immediately after the demise of his father seeking compassionate appointment, there is no material placed before this Court in support of such contention nor there is any averment in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition.

4. The compassionate appointment itself is an exception to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the same cannot be claimed as 3/5

a matter of right. The very scheme of compassionate appointment is only to provide livelihood to the dependent family members of the deceased employee. The petitioner is able to survive for 12 years after the demise of his father, who is now aged 29 years. Keeping the above facts and circumstances in view, this Court does not see any reason to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment.

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 15.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No CM TO

1. The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Ltd., Thanjavur District.

2. The General Manager,, Tamilnadu Trnasport Corporation, Kumbakonam Ltd., Perambalur Branch, Perambalur District..

4/5

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR,J CM WP(MD) No.16056 of 2026 Date : 15/06/2026 5/5