Judgment :- M. Chockalingam, J. Challenge is made to an order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P.No.5991 of 2001, dated 2. 2003, whereby the petitioner has requested for writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in No.PM/Estt/8-53/A-10/98-2000, dated 21. 2001 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with backwages and all other consequential benefits. 2. The Court heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the order under challenge along with the grounds on which the order is being assailed are looked into. 3. The case of the appellant/writ petitioner in short was that his father was working in the Pondicherry Municipality; that while he was in service, he died on 210. 1997; that the petitioners family consists of his mother and his younger sister; that he applied for compassionate appointment in the said Municipality; that after making a thorough enquiry and verification and the report, he was given appointment; that while he was serving as Sanitary Worker, an order of termination, dated 23.01.2001 came to be served upon him, which according to the petitioner cannot be sustained for the reasons that the said order of removal from service was made even without notice or enquiry and thus, fundamental principles of natural justice were violated; that apart from that, it is true, his mother was also working there at the time of death of his father; that he has already made an application for appointment as Sanitary Worker on compassionate ground; that only after a thorough enquiry, he was appointed; that he is working under the same Supervisor in the respondent Municipality and under these circumstances, the respondent should not be allowed to say that they had no knowledge as to the employment of his mother during the relevant time and apart from that, in the instant case, there was no suppression of any facts and hence the removal order cannot be sustained and that further, it was stated that there was misrepresentation, but the same was not done. Only after a thorough enquiry and verification, the appellant/petitioner was appointed and under these circumstances, an opportunity should have been given to him by serving notice and only then, any order could be passed, but not done so and hence it has got to be set aside and, by allowing the writ appeal. 4. The Court heard the learned counsel for the respondent on the above contentions and has paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made and also looked into the materials available. 5. It is not in controversy that the petitioner, pursuant to an order of appointment, was working as Sanitary Worker in the respondent Municipality and his service was terminated by an order, dated 21. 2001. The only grievance ventilated by the petitioner is that not even a notice was served upon him or enquiry was made before terminating him and thus, there was violation of principles of natural justice. It is also not in controversy that both his father and mother were working as Sanitary Workers and when he applied for employment on compassionate ground on the death of his father, his mother was actually working. It is not the case of the petitioner that it was he who brought to the notice of the Municipality the fact that his mother was working. The application, which was made before the Municipality seeking employment on compassionate ground, is also placed and perused, wherein it has been stated that he was the only member of the family seeking for appointment. The relevant portion of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition reads as follows: "... my father was working in the Pondicherry Municipality and due to some chronic liver problem my father expired on 210. 1997. My family consisting of my mother and my younger sister. I applied for compassionate appointment in the Pondicherry Municipality and the Pondicherry Municipality has referred my case to the Pondicherry Revenue Department for verification and report." A reading of the entire affidavit does not indicate anywhere that at the time when he applied for appointment, he had brought to the notice that his mother was also working. It is needless to say that the appointment on compassionate ground could be made only to see that the family of the deceased was not to be let out without any income for livelihood. 6. It is needless to say that the appointment on compassionate ground could be made only to see that the family of the deceased was not to be let out without any income for livelihood. 6. In the instant case, the contention put forth by the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner that when he made an application, there was a thorough enquiry and verification also and further, on appointment, he was also working under the same Supervisor and thus, it was well within the knowledge of the Municipality that his mother was working during the time, cannot be countenanced at all. First of all, the petitioner should have made it clear in his application that his mother was also working there and that the entire family would depend upon her income only. Under these circumstances, it was a thorough suppression of material facts, which should have been brought to the notice of the employer, but it was not done. Under these circumstances, the criteria for such employment itself was not satisfied by the petitioner and hence he cannot have any grievance. Further, the termination of service made by the Municipality cannot be attached with stigma. Hence by no stretch of imagination, it can be stated that the non issuance of notice or enquiry would lead to the violation of any principles of natural justice. Under these circumstances, it is a case where there was suppression of material facts and therefore, the Municipality should not have given appointment at all and thus, in the opinion of the Court, it is a case where the order of the learned Single Judge has got to be sustained. 7. Accordingly, the order of the learned Single Judge is sustained. This writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.