Compassionate Appointment Cannot Be Denied Solely On The Ground That The Petitioner Was An Illegitimate Child Born To Second Wife: Madras High Court Reiterates
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R.N. Manjula while deciding a writ petition in the case of M. Anantha Babu v. The District Collector & Ors. has reiterated that compassionate appointment cannot be denied solely on the ground that the child was from the second wife of the deceased employee. Background of FactsThe father of M. Anantha Babu (Petitioner) ...
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R.N. Manjula while deciding a writ petition in the case of M. Anantha Babu v. The District Collector & Ors. has reiterated that compassionate appointment cannot be denied solely on the ground that the child was from the second wife of the deceased employee.
Background of Facts
The father of M. Anantha Babu (Petitioner) was working as a Village Assistant and he died in 2007 while being in service. The Petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in 2008. However, in 2021, The District Collector (Respondent) passed an order (Impugned Order) rejecting the Petitioner's application stating that the Petitioner was an illegitimate son of the deceased employee who was born through the second wife when his first wife was alive. Aggrieved by this order, the Petitioner filed the present writ petition.
It was contended by the Petitioner that under the Hindu Succession Act, even a child born through void marriage needs to be considered as a legitimate child. Further, under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978, sons including step sons, adopted sons born through illegitimate wife are entitled to get Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity of the deceased government servant and hence a different yard stick cannot be adopted in respect of compassionate appointment
On the other hand, the Respondent in the Impugned Order stated that as per Government Letter No. 34 of Labour and Employment Department dated 16.04.2002, the children born out of void marriages are entitled for family pension and Death-cum-Retirement benefits but not compassionate appointment.
Findings of the Court
The court observed that legitimate children born out of void marriage have been recognised by law itself. The court relied on the judgement of Union of India and Ors. Vrs. V. K. Tripathi wherein the Supreme Court had observed that a child of a second wife of an employee could not be denied for compassionate appointment on that ground alone.
The court further relied on the Supreme Court Judgement of Mukesh Kumar and Ors. Vs. The Union of India (UOI) and Ors. which has clearly stated
“The purpose of compassionate appointment is to prevent destitution and penury in the family of a deceased employee……. Once Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 regards a child born from a marriage entered into while the earlier marriage is subsisting to be legitimate, it would not be open to the State, consistent with Article 14 to exclude such a child from seeking the benefit of compassionate appointment”
With the aforementioned observations, the court admitted the petition and directed the Respondents to reconsider the case of the Petitioner.
Case Title: M. Anantha Babu vs. The District Collector & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 147
Case No. W.P. No. 27139 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.28615 of 2021
Counsels for the Applicant: Mr. P. Ganesan, Mr. S. Satheesh Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. S. Rajesh