ORDER : This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the action of the respondents in not considering the representation, dated 26.09.2009 of the petitioner for providing compassionate appointment. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. Heard Sri K. Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. N. Anula, learned Standing counsel for respondent University. 4. The case of the petitioner is that while his mother working as Agricultural Workmen in the 2nd respondent organization died on 19.03.2009 in harness. Being the petitioner is the dependent and only legal heir to the deceased employee, he submitted a representation on 26.09.2009 requesting to appoint him in any suitable post on compassionate grounds. As his claim was not considered, he filed the present writ petition against the in action of the respondents. 5. On the other hand, the case of the respondents is that the contention of the petitioner that he submitted a representation on 26.09.2009 for appointment on compassionate grounds is false and only on 17.04.2010 he submitted representation to the 1st respondent. As per the existing rules under the scheme of compassionate appointment, the application for appointment on compassionate grounds from the spouse or the dependent children of the deceased government servant, who died in harness, there being no other earning member in the family, shall be submitted within a period of one year from the date of death. In view of the fact that the petitioner has approached for appointment on compassionate grounds after lapse of one year period, his case was not considered. However, it is contended that as the petitioner has not furnished his address for communication, his application could not be returned back to him with objections. 6. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel and upon perusing the material available on record, the admitted facts emerges that the mother of the petitioner died on 19.03.2009 in harness. At that time she was working as Agricultural Workmen in the 1st respondent organization. It is also an admitted fact that the dependents of the deceased employee are entitled for compassionate appointment subject to certain conditions. In the present case, the petitioner passed SSC in first division and he fulfilled eligibility criteria of age and educational qualifications. At that time she was working as Agricultural Workmen in the 1st respondent organization. It is also an admitted fact that the dependents of the deceased employee are entitled for compassionate appointment subject to certain conditions. In the present case, the petitioner passed SSC in first division and he fulfilled eligibility criteria of age and educational qualifications. It appears from the legal heir certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Seethampeta, in which it was stated that the petitioner is the only one son of the deceased and the husband of the deceased has already died before the death of the deceased. After conducting necessary enquiry, the Tahsildar, Seethampeta issued legal heir certificate certifying that the petitioner is the only legal heir to the deceased employee. The certificate was issued on 24.04.2009. 7. On perusal of the “no earning member” certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Seethampeta on 03.06.2009, it is certified that including the petitioner, no family members are working either in public sector or private sector. The SSC certificate reveals that the petitioner passed in first division. All the certificates established that the petitioner is having all requisite eligibilities and qualifications to be considered for any suitable post in the respondent organization on compassionate grounds. But, only ground raised by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 for not considering the case of the petitioner is that as per the existing scheme the dependents of the deceased employee have to submit applications seeking compassionate appointment within a period of one year from the date of death of deceased employee. 8. But, it is contended by Respondents that in this case the petitioner submitted his application beyond time stipulated. If the contention of the petitioner that he has submitted representation, dated 26.09.2009 seeking compassionate appointment is considered, the petitioner will succeed. If the contention of the respondents is taken into consideration that the petitioner has submitted application on 17.04.2010, there will be a delay of 28 days after stipulated time of one year (i.e) from the date of death of the mother of the petitioner. 9. It is further to be noted that the contention of the respondents that the petitioner is an earning member and is not dependent on any other distant relative for his livelihood is untenable in the light of no earning member certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Seethampeta, dated 03.06.2009. 10. 9. It is further to be noted that the contention of the respondents that the petitioner is an earning member and is not dependent on any other distant relative for his livelihood is untenable in the light of no earning member certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Seethampeta, dated 03.06.2009. 10. The scheme of compassionate appointment to the dependents of deceased Government employees is in force from the year, 1977 as per the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.687, General Administration (Ser.A) Department, dt.03.10.1977. Certain instructions/ clarifications/further orders were issued from time to time in the matter. A comprehensive note on the scheme of compassionate appointment to the dependents of the deceased Government employees is consolidated vide Circular Memo No.60681/Ser.A/2003-1 General Administration (Ser.A) Department, dated 12.08.2003. 11. The objective of the scheme of compassionate appointment is a social security measure to help families of deceased Government employees. Under the scheme, one of the dependent family members of the deceased government employee, who die in harness, is eligible for appointment to a job in a government service there being no other earning member in the family. 12. The maximum age limit shall be 33 years for Open Category, and for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/ Backward Classes 5 years age concession shall be given. With regard to the educational qualifications, the qualifications as prescribed in the Rules for the post for which the compassionate appointment is made. The eligibility of the candidate in terms of his/her educational qualification has to be reckoned with the date of application of the dependent of the deceased government employee for appointment, as the application for appointment from such persons shall be entertained within a period of one year from the date of occurrence of the death of Government servant. The application for appointment shall be submitted by the dependents within one year from the date of demise of the Government employee. In case the dependent children are minors, below 18 years of age, if such minors attain the age of 18 years within two years from the date of death, the application for appointment will be considered for compassionate appointment. 13. As the scheme of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate relief to the family in distress of deceased Government employee, orders on re-deployment of surplus manpower or any ban on recruitment are not applicable for the appointment made under the compassionate appointment scheme. 13. As the scheme of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate relief to the family in distress of deceased Government employee, orders on re-deployment of surplus manpower or any ban on recruitment are not applicable for the appointment made under the compassionate appointment scheme. Under the scheme a minimum period of 3 years to acquire Intermediate qualification and 5 years for acquisition of Degree qualification be allowed in respect of candidates appointed to the posts of Junior Assistants in the Subordinate Offices and Heads of Departments and Secretariat Departments as the case may be, the period should be reckoned from the date of appointment of the individual concerned. A further period of 2 years as grace period will be allowed to acquire the academic/Technical qualification. If the candidate could not acquire the prescribed qualification within the time allowed he/she will be considered for appointment to the lower post. 14. On careful examination of the object of the scheme of compassionate appointment provided to the dependents of the Government employees, who die in harness and the relaxations provided with regard to the age if the dependent is a minor and certain relaxation provided to acquire requisite qualifications, it has to be noted that with a noble object to help the families in distress of deceased employees, this scheme was introduced by the government which is laudable. But, it has to be considered that the dependents of the deceased employees in every case may not aware about the scheme and the stipulation of time to submit application and other conditions. Besides that due to untimely death of the bread winner of the family, the dependents of the deceased employee may be in a disturbed and sorrowful condition and it will take some time to them to come out into normal condition. Due to that reason, some delay may be occurred in submitting the application. The respondents ought to have considered the situation of the family of the deceased employee in a sympathetic way and with human touch and not only being followed by the technicalities. If there is an abnormal delay of some years, it may be difficult. But, in some cases, in which there is a delay of short period, beyond the stipulated time, some liberal approach has to be applied. 15. If there is an abnormal delay of some years, it may be difficult. But, in some cases, in which there is a delay of short period, beyond the stipulated time, some liberal approach has to be applied. 15. In the present case, if the date of representation i.e., 26.09.2009 as contended by the petitioner is considered, there will be no delay in submitting the application and it is well within the stipulated period. But, the contention of the respondents that the petitioner has submitted his application on 17.04.2010, there will be a delay of only 28 days from the date of application to the stipulated time. As there is some dispute with regard to the date of submission of the application and the delay also appears to be very meager, the respondents ought to have considered the claim of the petitioner sympathetically and with human outlook. 16. The respondents ought to have considered the indigent condition of the family and all other aspects (i.e) the bread winner of the family unfortunately met with premature death resulting into untold financial sufferings for the entire family. It appears, the respondents have completely lost sight of this aspect of the matter while rejecting the representation of the petitioner. It appears the respondents without considering all the aspects in a comprehensive manner only on technicalities rejected the representation of the petitioner to consider her case for appointment on compassionate grounds. 17. The sudden jerk in the family due to the sudden death of the bread winner can only be absorbed by providing with a compassionate appointment and the grief stricken family may find some solace to the mental agony they have suffered. 18. This Court is unable to agree with the stand of the respondents. In the opinion of this Court, if such claims are rejected on such technical grounds, the very object of scheme of compassionate appointments to help the destitute families would be defeated. 19. The view of this Court had fortified from the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Balbir Kaur vs. Steel Authority of India Limited, (2000) 6 SCC 493 , in which their Lordships held as hereunder: “In the case of appointment considering the social and economic justice as enshrined in the constitution, denials of deserving cases are liable to be set aside. Further, the purpose of providing compassionate ground to a son or daughter or a near relative of the deceased government servant is to render assistance to the family, which is found in indigenous circumstances. Hence, in considering the case for compassionate appointment, the authorities are supposed to adopt a humane outlook.” 20. In this regard, it is worthwhile to refer the case in the Superintending Engineer vs. V. Jaya, (2007) 6 MLJ 1011 , wherein their Lordships comprising a Division Bench of Madras High Court have held at para No.7 as extracted hereunder: 7. However, in a case of request for appointment on compassionate ground, however, the Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot ignore the very purpose of providing employment on compassionate ground to the dependant of an employee/government servant dying in harness in preference to anybody else as it is done so in order to mitigate the hardship to the family of the employee on account of his unexpected death while still in service. The concept of compassionate employment is intended to alleviate the distress of the family and it is for such purpose appointments are permissible and provided even in the rules and regulations and any rigid approach or too technical objections may defeat the very object of the scheme. It is for that purpose while considering the request for compassionate appointment; the authorities are expected to act as a Good Samaritan overlooking the cobwebs of technicalities. 21. For the above mentioned reasons, as the petitioner is fulfilling all the requisite eligibilities and qualifications required under the scheme of compassionate appointment and rejecting the claim of the petitioner only on the ground that there is a delay of 28 days in submitting application beyond the stipulated time is unreasonable, unjust and violative of principles of natural justice. 22. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in their organization in any suitable post within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.