Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 174 (MAD)

M. Kamitha Banu v. District Collector, O/o. the Collectorate Office, Thirunelveli, Thirunelveli District

2016-01-18

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2016
ORDER : The petitioner's mother worked as Cook Assistant at Ramasamy Elementary School, Kottaiyur, Vasudevanallur, Sivagiri Taluk, Thirunelveli District. 2. The mother of the petitioner died on 09.04.2009. Before her death, the petitioner got married on 09.05.2004. On the death of her mother, the petitioner made representation to provide her compassionate appointment. Her representation was rejected by P.A. to Collector (Noon Meal), Thirunelveli District, by the impugned order dated 03.11.2011. The impugned order reads as follows: This writ petition is filed to quashed the aforesaid order dated 03.11.2011. 3. When the matter came up for admission, the learned Government Advocate, who represented for R1 and R2, was directed to get instructions as to the scheme relating to compassionate appointment in M.G.R.Noon Meal Nutritious Scheme. It is useful to extract the order that was passed by this Court on 14.12.2015. “Mr. K.P.Krishnadoss, learned G.A. takes notice for R1 and 2. Mr. T.R.Janarthanan, learned G.A. takes notice for R3. Learned G.A. appearing for R1 and R2 is directed to get instructions as to the scheme relating to compassionate appointment in M.G.R.Noon Meal Nutritious Scheme, since it is stated in the impugned order dated 03.11.2011 by the second respondent that the compassionate appointment scheme in the M.G.R. Noon Meal Nutritious Scheme does not provide for compassionate appointment to the married daughters.” Today, when the matter is listed, the learned Government Advocate has fairly stated that the impugned order refusing to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the ground that she was married is contrary to the Government orders and more particularly, G.O.Ms.No.96, Labour and Employment Department, dated 30.08.2010. 4. In these circumstances, he has stated that the petitioner would be given compassionate appointment based on the seniority maintained by the department. 5. In view of the said submission, the impugned order is quashed and the statement made by the learned Government Advocate that compassionate appointment to the petitioner would be given based on the seniority as maintained by the department is recorded. 6. This writ petition is disposed of with the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 are closed.