Judgment : N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J. 1. This writ appeal is filed against the order made in W.P.No.15485 of 2011 dated 04.7.2011 wherein the request made by the appellant seeking compassionate appointment which was rejected by the 1st respondent vide order dated 03.5.2010 was challenged with a further direction to the respondents to give appointment to the appellant on compassionate ground in the place of his deceased mother. Aggrieved by the said order passed in the writ petition, the appellant has preferred this writ appeal. 2. The case of the appellant before the learned single Judge was that his mother K.Bhuwanaeshwari was employed as Selection Grade Typist in the District Employment Office, Thiruvarur and while in service, she died on 02.9.1998 due to cardiac arrest, leaving behind the legal heirs viz., the appellant and his sister. Appellant's father G.Jeyakumar, who is employed as Office Assistant in the District Employment Office at Trichy had deserted appellant's mother and the family prior to the demise of the appellant's mother. Thus, the appellant and his sister were entirely dependant upon the salary of the appellant's mother. After the demise of the appellant's mother, the appellant, as a legal heir, applied to the respondents in the prescribed form on 11.8.1999 seeking compassionate appointment with No Objection Certificate from the appellant's sister, who is the only other legal heir. As there was no response, a reminder was sent on 08.6.2001 by the appellant. No action being taken for five years, the appellant filed W.P.No.39132 of 2005 before this Court praying to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint him in anyone of the suitable post on compassionate grounds by considering his representations dated 11.8.1999 and 16.6.2001 respectively. This Court, by an order dated 07.1.2010 directed the Director of Employment and Training Department, Chepauk, Chennai to consider the representations of the appellant dated 11.8.1999 and 16.6.2001 and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, as the ban order issued by the Government not to fill up vacancies on compassionate grounds was lifted by G.O.Ms.No.16 Personnel & Administrative Reforms (G) Department, dated 21.2.2006. 3. 3. The 1st respondent rejected the request of the appellant by order dated 03.5.2010 stating that at the time of the death of appellant's mother, appellant's father was in employment and therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be appointed on compassionate grounds. The order of the 1st respondent dated 03.5.2010 was challenged before the learned single Judge by relying upon G.O.Ms.No.155 Labour and Employment Department, dated 16.7.1993 wherein it is stated that if one of the dependant of the family is employed even before the death of the Government servant and was living separately without extending any help to the family, the other member of the family is eligible to seek appointment on compassionate grounds. The appellant has obtained certificate dated 09.3.2006 from the Tahsildar, Thanjavur stating that appellant's father was living separately and not looking after the family and therefore, the family is in indigent circumstance. 4. The said aspect was raised by the appellant before the learned single Judge specifically. Though in the narration of facts, G.O.Ms.No.155 Labour and Employment Department, dated 16.7.1993 is stated, on facts, no finding is given with regard to the applicability of the said Government Order and the ineligibility of the appellant seeking compassionate appointment by relying on the said Government Order, which reads as follows:- GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU ABSTRACT Public Services – Appointment on compassionate grounds – Indigent circumstances of families of deceased Government Servant – Provident Fund & Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity not to be included – Appointment to one member if another member was already employed in the family of the deceased – Clarifications – Issued. LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT G.O. (Ms) No. 155 Dated : 16.7.1993 Read: 1. G.O. (Ms) No. 225, Labour & Employment dated 15.2.72 2. G.O. (Ms) No. 560, Labour and Employment dated 3.8.77 3. G.O. (Ms) No. 998, Labour and Employment dated 2.5.81 4. Govt. Lr.No.18274/N1/82-3 Labour and Employment dated 9.7.82 5. G.O. (Ms) No. 73, Employment service, dated 26.10.83 6. G.O. (Ms) No. 8, Employment service dated 7.1.87 7. G.O. (Ms) No. 567, Labour & Employment dated 11.4.90 Read also: 8. G.O. (Ms) No. 23, Labour & Employment dated 10.2.93 ORDER: One of the conditions prescribed under the scheme of appointment on compassionate grounds formulated in the G.O. First read above is that the family of the deceased Government Servant should be in “indigent circumstances”. G.O. (Ms) No. 567, Labour & Employment dated 11.4.90 Read also: 8. G.O. (Ms) No. 23, Labour & Employment dated 10.2.93 ORDER: One of the conditions prescribed under the scheme of appointment on compassionate grounds formulated in the G.O. First read above is that the family of the deceased Government Servant should be in “indigent circumstances”. Another condition introduced in the G.O. third read above is that if there is already any earning member in the family of the Government Servant who died in harness, the other dependants of the deceased Government servant will not be eligible for compassionate appointment. 2. The Government have re-examined the above mentioned conditions. The expression “indigent circumstances” has not been precisely defined. It has been left mostly to the subjective satisfaction of the appointing authorities. Therefore the Service Associations have represented that this condition be deleted. The family of a deceased Government Servant is entitled to Provident Fund, accumulations, Family Benefit, Death cum Retirement Gratuity, Encashment of leave at credit at the time of death, etc. The Government consider that those amounts or the interest earnings that will accrue on depositing these amount; need not be taken into consideration. It is therefore necessary to ascertain whether the family is having immovable property like houses, lands etc., the income from which is substantial to sustain the family without any extra help. The Government therefore direct that the criteria for indigent circumstances is that the family should not own any house or landed properties or if owned, the income from which is insufficient to sustain the family. A certificate from the Tahsildar to this effect will have to be produced. 3. In regard to the second condition mentioned in para 1 above, it is considered that if a member of the family is already on employment and supports the family then the restriction may be applied. When a dependent of the family is employed, the factors to be ascertained are, whether he is regularly employed and is actually supporting the family. If that person was employed even before the death of the Government Servant and was living separately without extending any help to the family, then the case of other eligible dependants will be considered. 4. However, the restriction that only one of the dependants will be entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds will continue. 5. Only the dependants of the deceased Government Servant viz. 4. However, the restriction that only one of the dependants will be entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds will continue. 5. Only the dependants of the deceased Government Servant viz. wife/husband/son, unmarried daughter will be eligible for appointment. If the widow is not educationally qualified/eligible for appointment, she could be given a job like sweeper. The Government also direct that a married daughter who is deserted by her husband and living with the family of the deceased Government Servant and widowed or divorced daughter living with the family may be considered, if the widow of the deceased Government Servant gives her consent in writing. 6. Age restrictions of 30 in the case of sons/unmarried daughters or 40 in the case of widow/widower will continue. 7. All cases requiring relaxation will be decided by the Committee constituted with reference to para 20 of the Chief Minister’s standing order No.2, Personnel and Administrative Reforms dated 9.1.92. 8. These orders will be applicable to families of Government Servants who have retired on medical invalidation before attaining the age of 50 years. BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR R. VARADHARAJULU Secretary to Government 5. In the rejection order passed by the 1st respondent also, the effect of the said Government Order has not been gone into. In the decision reported in 2005 (5) CTC 655 [C.Jayapal v. The Director of Medical Education, Chennai-10 and others], the Division Bench of this Court has considered the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.155 Labour and Employment Department, dated 16.7.1993 and ordered to give appointment on compassionate ground on the satisfaction of the conditions contained in the said Government Order. There is no dispute that the appellant has submitted application within one year and the same was kept pending for 11 years by the 1st respondent and the income certificate produced by the appellant proves the indigent circumstances of the appellant's family. 6. There is no dispute that the appellant has submitted application within one year and the same was kept pending for 11 years by the 1st respondent and the income certificate produced by the appellant proves the indigent circumstances of the appellant's family. 6. In such circumstances, the order of the 1st respondent dated 03.5.2010, which was affirmed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.15485 of 2011 dated 04.7.2011 is set aside and the entire matter is remitted to the 1st respondent to re-consider the issue bearing in mind G.O.Ms.No.155 Labour and Employment Department, dated 16.7.1993 as well as the certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Thanjavur referred above in the light of the Division Bench judgment cited supra and pass fresh orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 7. The writ appeal is allowed with the above direction. No costs.