Application For Compassionate Appointment Can Be Made By A Minor Under Tamil Nadu Compassionate Appointment Rules, 2023: Madras High Court

Update: 2024-05-04 08:15 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R. Suresh Kumar and Justice G. Arul Murugan while deciding a Writ Appeal in the case of State of TN & Ors Vs. C. Arnold has held that application for compassionate appointment can be made by a minor under Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 2023. However appointment to...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R. Suresh Kumar and Justice G. Arul Murugan while deciding a Writ Appeal in the case of State of TN & Ors Vs. C. Arnold has held that application for compassionate appointment can be made by a minor under Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 2023. However appointment to such an applicant can be given only once they attain the age of majority.

Background Facts

The father of C. Arnold (Respondent) was working as a B.T. Assistant in a Government High School and he passed away on 03.01.2016 while in service. The Respondent was 15 year and 6 months old at the time of death of his father. On behalf of the Respondent, his mother made an application dated 02.01.2018 seeking compassionate appointment but the said application was rejected in 2023 by the Chief Educational Officer on the ground that the Respondent was a minor at the time of making the application. Thus, the Respondent filed a writ petition before the Madras High Court.

The single judge bench took note of Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 2023 (Compassionate Appointment Rules) under which there is no minimum age limit for making an application for compassionate appointment but an appointment order could be issued only on completion of 18 years of age. Based on the above Rule, the single judge allowed the writ petition. Thus, the Appellants filed a Writ Appeal against the order of the single judge.

It was contended by the Appellants at the time of making the application, the Respondent was a minor whose age was 15 years and 6 months. Thus, when the Respondent would have attained majority, the period of 3 years from the date of death of the father of the Respondent would be over. As per the earlier rule dated 10.12.2014, beyond a period of 3 years, compassionate appointment would not be considered.

Findings of the Court

The court observed that no person can be employed in any organization unless they attain majority i.e. above 18 years of age. As per the erstwhile position, when an employee died, usually their son or daughter would be a minor and it took them some years to attain majority. During this time, the time period of 3 years from the death of employee would be over and claims for compassionate appointment were rejected on this ground. However, the state government recognized the difficulties caused by this rule and thus issued the Compassionate Appointment Rules.

The court further observed that as per Rule 6 of the Compassionate Appointment Rules, at the time of making the application of compassionate appointment, it is not mandatory that the applicant is of minimum years of age and an application can be made even on behalf of a minor. However, when such an application is considered, the appointment can be given to the legal heir only after they attain majority.

The court further observed that the intention of the above-mentioned rule is that compassionate appointment should not be denied for want of majority of age

With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Appeal was dismissed.

Case No.- W.A(MD)No.479 of 2024

Case Name- State of TN & Ors Vs. C. Arnold

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 184

Counsel for the Petitioner- Mr.D.Sadiq Raja

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment


Full View




Tags:    

Similar News