Uthandakumar v. The Chief Engineer (Recruitment)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 10/06/2024

CORAM

The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Uthandakumar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Chief Engineer (Recruitment), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, No.144 Anna Salai, Chennai - 2..

2. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, Madurai Distribution Circle, Madurai..

... Respondents PRAYER :-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings Ka.No.002761/Me.Po/Ma.Me.Pa.Va/ MaThu/NeA/NeMe/NeB2/Uo3/Ko.Va.Ve/2018 dated 07.03.2018 dated 07.03.2018 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to give suitable job to the petitioner on the compassionate grounds.

1/4

For Petitioner :Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi, For Respondents :Mr.B.Ramanathan

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 07.03.2018 and consequently to direct the respondents to give suitable job to the petitioner on the compassionate grounds.

3. The petitioner's father, who was working in the respondent department, died on 24.05.2013, while he was in service. The petitioner's mother, being the legal heir, made an application seeking compassionate appointment. When the application was made, the petitioner was a minor and hence, the application was rejected on 07.03.2018 stating that the application was not made within three years time and that at the time, when the application was made, the petitioner has not completed 18 years and did not have minimum educational qualification. 2/4

4. Even though the petitioner was a minor, his mother has given an application within three years and when the application was rejected on 07.03.2018, the petitioner had completed 19 years. Hence, the application ought not to have been rejected on the ground that the petitioner was a minor. Even the educational qualification of the petitioner said to be above 8th standard and hence, the respondents could have considered the application in better perspective and pass orders.

5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of by remitting back the matter to the respondents to pass orders afresh within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

10.06.2024 RR 3/4

R.N.MANJULA,J RR

ORDER

IN WP(MD) No.23618 of 2023 Date : 10/06/2024 4/4