Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3044 (MAD)

M. Charlie v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board

2014-09-02

S.VAIDYANATHAN

body2014
Judgment 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the orders in Letter No.04941/ Ni.Pa.3/ou.2/Ko.Vave/2012 dated 1.12.2012 passed by the third respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable being violative of rules and principles of natural justice and thereby direct the respondents to provide appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds in any suitable post commensurate with his qualification, consequent on the death of his father on 22.12.2005 while in service of the respondent-Board. 2. The petitioner's father G.Mohan was employed in the Electricity Board and his father died on 22.12.2005 while in service. According to the petitioner, his mother made a representation dated 27.11.2008, seeking for compassionate appointment to the children of the deceased employee. But the request of the petitioner's mother was turned down, on 27.11.2008, on the ground that the children were minors. In that order, it has been represented that if there are legal heirs/dependents, they can apply for compassionate appointment on or before 21.12.2008. On 10.12.2008, the petitioner stated that his mother has made a representation to the Electricity Board stating that her elder son Damodaran, aged 19 years, has studied only upto VI Standard and hence the employment may be given to the petitioner on completion of his 18 years of age. The petitioner's mother has also sent another reminder on 1.8.2012 and the postal acknowledgment shows that the application was received by the Electricity Board on 2.8.2012. On 1.12.2012, the application was rejected on the ground that the application should have been filed within three years from the date of death of the deceased employee and on the date of application, the eligible dependents should have completed VIII Standard and also completed 18 years of age and as the application has been made after three years from the date of death of the deceased employee, the application cannot be entertained and the same was rejected. 3. 3. Mrs.R.Varalakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for the Electricity Board contended that even though they had prescribed that an application should be filed within three years from the date of death of the deceased employee, subsequently, by Board's Proceedings No.46 dated 13.10.1995, the same has been modified, in view of the decision of this Court that an application should be made by a person on attaining the age of majority and the application should be filed within three years from the date of attaining majority. In case, the person, who is major on the date of death of the deceased employee, the application has got to be filed within three years. 4. The respondents submitted that the date of birth of the writ petitioner is 19.3.1992 and he completed 18 years of age on 18.3.2010 and that no application has been made by the petitioner, that the mother of the petitioner alone has applied for compassionate appointment, the rejection was perfectly in order. 5. Heard Mr.A.R.Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.R.Varalakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for the Electricity Board. I have also gone through the representations of the petitioner's mother dated 10.12.2008 and 1.8.2012. Both the letters specifically state that the employment may be given to the writ petitioner. Even though it has been specifically argued that the application of the mother of the petitioner was not received by the Electricity Board, the Postal Acknowledgment shows that the application was received on 2.8.2012. 6. Since the petitioner has been making repeated requests for compassionate appointment, rejection of the application of the mother of the petitioner by the Electricity Board on the ground that the petitioner has not applied for compassionate ground, cannot be accepted by this Court. The petitioner made a representation originally, which was rejected on 27.11.2008. The representation was made within three years from the date of death of the deceased employee. Another representation was made on 10.12.2008. Even though the respondents denied such application received, there is a postal acknowledgment produced by the petitioner to show that the representation dated 1.8.2012, was made by the mother of the petitioner, after the petitioner has attained majority and it is within three years from the date of attaining the majority. 7. Another representation was made on 10.12.2008. Even though the respondents denied such application received, there is a postal acknowledgment produced by the petitioner to show that the representation dated 1.8.2012, was made by the mother of the petitioner, after the petitioner has attained majority and it is within three years from the date of attaining the majority. 7. Even though the petitioner has not applied for compassionate appointment, it is to be noted that the mother of the petitioner has been repeatedly making requests by way of representations to the Electricity Board to consider the claim for compassionate appointment. This letter can be treated as a representation and also the no objection of the mother of the petitioner in getting her son employed in the Electricity Board, if he fulfills other required qualifications or eligibility prescribed by the Electricity Board in getting compassionate appointment. Having regard to the same, I am not inclined to reject the case of the petitioner on a technical ground that the petitioner has not made any representation. Since there is already a representation made by his mother which has been considered and rejected by the Electricity Board and consequent representations by the mother of the petitioner after he attains majority, without harping on the technicalities, such as latches and proper person to make representation, the Electricity Board ought to have considered the claim of the petitioner. 8. For the reasons stated above, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the Electricity Board for providing compassionate appointment along with documents in support of educational qualifications, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such representation being made, the Electricity Board is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner suitable to his qualifications, within a period of three months thereafter. 9. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs.