IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:25.03.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.4483 of 2004 and M.P.No.4800 of 2005 Shanmugam ...Petitioner Versus The Superintending Engineer, Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution-Circle, Dharmapuri-5. ...Respondent Prayer: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in Ka.No.018171/1240/Ni.Pi.2(3)No.Ve.Va/2000 dated 08.09.2000 passed by the Respondent herein and quash the same as illegal and direct the Respondent to give compassionate ground appointment to the petitioner. For petitioner : Mr.K.Gandhikumar For Respondent:Mr.B.Sekar ORDER
The present writ petition is filed by Shanmugam S/o of Late Pachaippan seeking issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in Ka.No.018171/1240/Ni.Pi.2(3)No.Ve.Va/2000 dated 08.09.2000, passed by the respondent, and to quash the same as illegal and also to direct the respondent to grant compassionate ground appointment to the petitioner.
2.The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner’s father who worked as a Line Inspector under the control of the Superintending Engineer,Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution-Circle, Dharmapuri, on account of continuous ill-health, died on 08.05.2000. Thereafter, the petitioner’s mother received all the benefits and the petitioner Shanmugam being the only son, applied for compassionate appointment on 20.08.2000 and the same was also received by 24.08.2000.
3.But, the respondent, after considering the case of the petitioner, for appointment on compassionate ground, rejected the petitioner’s application by order dated 08.09.2000, in its Proceedings in Na.Ka.No.018171/1240/Ni.Pi.2(3)No.Ve.Va/2000 dated 08.09.2000 stating that the service of the petitioner’s father was invalidated by the Medical Board with effect from 14.07.1999 and, therefore, the petitioner’s father was given the benefit of retirement on reaching the age of 50 years and 12 days as on the date of passing the impugned order. The said order is being assailed by the present writ petitioner on the ground that though the petitioner’s father made an application well in advance before reaching the age of 50 years, but he has been given retirement only on reaching the age of 50 years. Therefore, the said impugned order is not valid in law and on that basis, he prayed for quashing the impugned order and also further prayed this Honourable Court to issue direction to the respondent to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground in any of the offices of the respondent.
4.Opposing the above said prayer, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner’s father was suffering from long illness. Therefore, his case was referred to the Medical Board and the Medical Board, having seen the incapacity of the petitioner’s father, came to the conclusion that the service of the petitioner’s father cannot be utilised by the respondent. Therefore, by taking on record, the application made by the petitioner’s father, order has been passed by the Chairman relieving the petitioner’s father stating that the petitioner’s father is permanently incapacitated and cannot be further continued in service. The respondent, on considering the application made by the petitioner’s father seeking retirement on the ground of incapacity, exercising power under Regulation 85 of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, ordered that the service of the petitioner’s father shall be invalidated from the Board’s services with effect from 14.07.1999 on medical grounds, subject to recovery of dues, if any, from him to the Board from his terminal benefits.
5.In his further submission, the learned counsel for the respondent also relied upon G.O.letter No.22247/N1/82-4 dated 23.11.1982. As per the said G.O., the Government have also extended the concession of direct appointment without reference to the Employment Exchange, given to the son/daughter/near relative of a Government servant who dies in harness, to the son/daughter/ near relative of a Government servant who retires from Government service on medical invalidation under Article 441 read with Articles 452 and 454 of the Civil Service Regulations. It is further made clear that the benefit of above said G.O. was extended to the sons, unmarried daughters, wife and husband of officers retiring after they have attained the age of 50 years, but as the Government has decided that the benefit of compassionate appointment envisaged in the above said G.O. should be confined to the cases wherein the Government servants retire on medical grounds before they attain the age of 50 years, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered. On that basis, prayed for dismissal of the present writ petition.
6.Heard, the counsel of both the sides.
7.Admittedly, the petitioner’s father retired on reaching the age of 50 years from the service of the first respondent and the respondent also, while considering the application made by the petitioner’s father have passed the order by exercising power under Regulation 85 Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Services Regulation on the ground that he has already reached 50 years and the Medical Board has already certified the petitioner’s permanent incapacity to render any service with the respondent office. Since the respondent has passed an order directing that the petitioner’s father would be deemed to have been retired on reaching the age of 50 years i.e., from 14.07.1999, the petitioner’s application has rightly been rejected and the same cannot be found fault with.
8.Further, at the time of making an application, the petitioner’s father was well aware of the prevailing G.O. Dated 23.11.1982. As per the above said G.O., it was made clear that the person seeking to retire from the service of the respondent reaching the age of 50 years are not entitled to have the benefit of appointment on compassionate ground. Before reaching the age of 50 years only, the respondent Board has passed the order stating that the petitioner has retired with effect from the date on which he has reached the age of 50 years. It is the admitted case that since the petitioner has retired from service on reaching 50 years and the same is covered by the above said G.O. Dated 23.11.1982, the respondent has rightly passed the impugned order. Hence, this Court does not find any substance, and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
gv
To
The Superintending Engineer,
Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution-Circle,
Dharmapuri 5