Madras High Court Hears Writ Petition Seeking Direction for Compassionate Appointment Under Article 226. Petitioner, Whose Father Died in 2009 While Serving as Office Assistant, Seeks Appointment After Attaining Majority in 2018.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal
  • 6
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents, officials of the Tamil Nadu Education Department, to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner, S. Murugeshwari. The petitioner's father was working as an Office Assistant in a Government Higher Secondary School and died in harness on 13 June 2009 at the age of 33 years. At the time of his death, the petitioner was only 8 years old. She attained majority in 2018 and thereafter submitted an application for compassionate appointment in July 2019, along with requisite certificates including a no-objection undertaking from her mother and grand-mother, and a certificate from the Tahsildar dated 23 May 2023. The authorities did not consider her application, leading to the filing of this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the delay was because the petitioner was a minor at the time of her father's death and the family was in financial distress. The Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that the fourth respondent, the District Educational Officer, would consider the application. The matter was heard by the Honourable Mr. Justice Battu Devanand. The judgment text provided is incomplete and does not contain any final order or direction. The court recorded the submissions of both sides, but as per the available record, no decision was pronounced. Hence, the outcome of the petition remains undisclosed from the text supplied. The court directed listing of the matter, but the closure is not captured. Thus, the final relief sought by the petitioner is yet to be determined.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide compassionate appointment on the basis of her educational qualification, given the delay due to her minority at the time of her father's death.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
  • Compassionate Appointment on compassionate grounds
  • Government Service
  • Education Department
  • Delay due to minority
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 93

W.P.(MD)No.4517 of 2025

2025-02-19

The Honourable Mr.Justice Battu Devanand

For Petitioner: Mr.P.Manikandan; For Respondents: Mr.M.Siddharthan, Additional Government Pleader

S. Murugeshwari

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Secretary to Government, Education Department; 2. The Director of School Education; 3. The Co-Director of School Education; 4. The District Educational Officer, Dindigul District; 5. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Vedasanthur Thaluk, Dindigul District

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus for compassionate appointment.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to provide compassionate appointment on the basis of her educational qualification within a time limit stipulated by the court.

Filing Reason

Petitioner's father died in harness on 13.06.2009; petitioner was a minor (8 years old) at the time; she attained majority in 2018 and submitted an application in July 2019, but the respondents failed to consider the representation.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment despite the inordinate delay caused by her minority at the time of her father's death.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submits that the father died in harness, petitioner was a minor, she applied after attaining majority with all necessary documents and no-objection undertaking, but representation was not considered. Additional Government Pleader for respondents submits that the application will be considered by the fourth respondent (District Educational Officer).

Judgment Excerpts

the father of the petitioner who was working as an Office Assistant died in harness on 13.06.2009. He submitted an application to the respondents for compassionate appointment in the month of July 2019, along with relevant certificates

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Hears Writ Petition Seeking Direction for Compassionate Appointment Under Article 226. Petitioner, Whose Father Died in 2009 While Serving as Office Assistant, Seeks Appointment After Attaining Majority in 2018.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Upholds Absorption Rules and Pay Fixation for Deputation Employees in BBMP - Rules Not Ultra Vires. The court held that Rules 4(i) and 4(ii) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Absorption of Assistant Engineers/Junior Eng...