A.Gangeswaran v. Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 14.08.2009CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJAWP.NO.19311 Of 2004and WPMP.No.23236 of 2004A.Gangeswaran,s/o.K.K.Angappan. .. Petitioner Vs.1.The State of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by its Secretary to the Government,Environment & Forest Department,(Forest-I) Dept.,Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.2.The Principal Chief Conservator,of Forests, Panagal Building,1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet,Chennai – 600 015... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition is filed under article 226 of the Constitutionof India praying to issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamusdirecting the first respondent in his proceedings No.3335/Forest-1/02-03 dated 02.05.20002 and quash the same and direct therespondents to consider and appoint the petitioner herein as JuniorAssistant on Compassionate ground appointment in the ForestDepartment.For Petitioner : Mr.V.Velusamy. For Mr.M.A.Abdul WahabFor Respondents : Mr.S.N.Kirubanandam, Spl. G.P. (Forests) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E RThe present writ petition seeking a direction to the respondentsto consider and appoint the petitioner herein as Junior Assistant oncompassionate ground in the forest department by issuing properappointment order.2. The case of the petitioner A.Gangeeswaran s/o. K.K.Angappanis that while his father K.K.Angappan was working as Forester in theForest Department under the second respondent died in harness on16.06.1996. Since the petitioner was minor at the time, thepetitioner's mother gave an application seeking an appointment oncompassionate ground on 18.06.1996. Having seen the plight of thepetitioner's family, the second respondent orally agreed to considerher request but since the present petitioner was minor at the time hewas not able to get him appointed.3. He was neither qualified educationally nor physicallytherefore, he had to wait to qualify himself for better job in thedepartment, accordingly, the Petitioner later on, qualified bypassing +2 examination. After getting the +2 passed certificate fromthe school, the petitioner made application on 30.05.2001 requestingthe second respondent to consider the request of the petitioner forcompassionate ground appointment in the second respondents office.4. For the reasons that the application should be made withinthree years from the date of the death of the deceased in harness.The application dated 30.05.2001 was rejected by the respondents, inview of the rejection of the application refusing to consider hisclaim for compassionate ground, the present writ petition has beenfiled seeking the prayer mentioned in the petition. The object ofgiving compassionate appointment is only to help the poor family fromsudden crisis, the purpose of providing appointment on compassionateground is to medicate hardship due to sudden death of bread earner ina family such appointment should, therefore provided immediately toredeem the family stress. This court has repeatedly held, when thesole bread winner of the family dies in harness leaving thedependents and his family in terrible poverty, qualified people inthe family has to be considered for the purpose of helping the familyfrom the poverty.5. The whole object of granting Compassionate Appointment isto enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The Government(or) Public Authority concerned has to examine the financialcondition of the family of the deceased and it is only if itsatisfied, that but for the provision of employment, the family willnot be able to meet crisis that a job is to be offered to theeligible member of the family. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

6. It is a settled law that offering Compassionate Appointmentas a matter of course irrespective of financial condition of thefamily of the deceased and making compassionate appointments in postsabove classes III and IV, is legally impermissible. As a rule,appointments in the public services should be made strictly on thebasis of open invitation of the applications and on merits. No othermode of appointment nor any other consideration is permissible.Neither the Governments nor the public authorities can takeexceptions or relax qualifications in this regard. However, to thisgeneral rule which is to be followed strictly in every case, thereare some exceptions carved out in the interest of justice and to meetcertain contingencies. One such exception is in favour of thedependents of employee dying in harness and leaving his family inpenury and without any means of livelihood. In such cases, out ofpure humanitarian consideration taking into account of the fact thatunless some sources of livelihood is provided, the family would notbe able to make both ends meet, a provision is made in the rules toprovide gainful employment to one of the dependents of the deceasedwho may be eligible for such employment.7.Therefore, the whole object of granting Compassionateemployment is only to enable the family to tide over the suddencrisis created all of a sudden by the death of the bread winner,member of the family.8. The post in classes III and IV are the lowest post in non-manual and manual categories and hence they alone can be offered oncompassionate grounds the object being to relieve the family, of thefinancial destitution and to help it get over the emergency. In suchcircumstances, the provision of employment in such lowest post bymaking an exception to the rule is justifiable and valid since it isnot discriminatory. The favourable treatment given to such dependentof the deceased employee in such posts has a rational nexus with theobject sought to be achieved i.e., relief against destitution. Butat the same time, no other posts are expected or required to be givenby the public authorities for the said purposes. 9. In the present case, the petitioner has been makingrepresentations right from the day his father's death on 18.06.1986.Subsequently, he also made his application on 30.05.2001 the reasonfor making such a belated application is understandable as he was notphysically or mentally or educationally qualified till he passed the+2 examination.10. Therefore, though the petitioner made a prayer that heshould be considered to the post of Junior Assistant on compassionateground in the forest department, this court is not inclined to give a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ direction to appoint him as Junior Assistant but at the same timesince the family requires timely assistance, this court is of theconsidered view that the request for appointment of the petitioner oncompassionate ground in any post suitable to his qualification can beconsidered. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, directing thesecond respondent to consider and appoint the petitioner oncompassionate ground on any suitable post, commensurate to hiseducational qualification as on today and the same exercise shall bedone within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. Further this court makes it clear this order will not betreated as a precedent in the same department. Consequently, theconnected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar tshTo1.The Secretary to the Government,The State of Tamil Nadu,Environment & Forest Department,(Forest-I) Dept.,Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.2.The Principal Chief Conservator,of Forests, Panagal Building,1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet,Chennai – 600 015.+ 1 cc to Spl. Govt. Pleader SR 38801+ 1 cc to M/s. M.A.Abdul Wahab, Advocate SR 38872 WP.No.19311 of 2004SR (CO)RH (19.10.09)