Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has stated that his father R.Karuvelamuthu, who was working in the respondent Board, had died in harness, on 12.11.1996. On 29.4.1997, the petitioner's mother had applied to the respondent for appointing him on compassionate grounds, as his family was in indigent circumstances. 2. The petitioner has stated that he had submitted an application, on 9.1.1998, requesting the respondent to give him an employment, commensurate with his educational qualifications. The petitioner had obtained M.Sc. degree in zoology with a first class and he was undergoing post graduate diploma course in hydrogeology. 3. The petitioner has further stated that he had submitted a representation, on 3.5.1998, requesting the respondent to appoint the petitioner, as a junior water analyst. However, the respondent had been appointed as a junior assistant, on 2.9.1998. Pursuant to his appointment, he had joined in the post of junior assistant, in the office of the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, RWS Division, Thanjavur, on 29.9.1998. After having been appointed in service in the said post, he had given an application, on 19.3.1999, to the respondent, to consider him for being appointed, as a junior water analyst, as per the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board regulations, as he had also passed the diploma in hydrology, in first class. However, the petitioner had not been appointed as a junior water analyst, even though some other persons, who were appointed on compassionate grounds, had been appointed as junior water analysts. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the constitution of India. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, the averments and allegations made by the petitioner had been denied. 5. It had been stated that the post of junior water analyst is to be filled up only by promotion and by way of transfer. Therefore, the petitioner is not eligible to be appointed, as junior water analyst, by direct recruitment, on compassionate grounds. 6. It had also been stated that all the other persons named by the petitioner had been appointed in the post of junior water analyst, only by way of promotion. Further, they were senior in rank as compared to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is not eligible to be appointed, as junior water analyst, by direct recruitment, on compassionate grounds. 6. It had also been stated that all the other persons named by the petitioner had been appointed in the post of junior water analyst, only by way of promotion. Further, they were senior in rank as compared to the petitioner. Hence, there is no irregularity or illegality in the appointment of the petitioner as a junior assistant, on 2.9.1998, on compassionate grounds, as he was qualified only to be appointed in the said post, at that time. As such, the writ petition is devoid merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. 7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides and in view of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner, in the present writ petition. 8. The petitioner has not been in a position to show that he was qualified to be appointed, as a junior water analyst, on 2.9.1998, when he had been appointed as a junior assistant, in the office of the the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, RWS Division, Thanjavur, on compassionate grounds. 9. It is also seen that the post of junior water analyst is to be filled up only by promotion and by way of transfer, as per the Service Rules applicable to the service of the petitioner. It is also seen that all the other persons named by the petitioner had been promoted to the post of junior water analyst, as they were senior in rank, as compared to the petitioner. Even otherwise, it is a well settled position of law that an appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be demanded, as a matter of right, as the appointments are made without strict adherence to the normal rules of the recruitment. As such, the writ petition is devoid of merits. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Connected W.P.M.P.No.12685 of 2006 is closed.