LAWS(MAD)-2014-6-466

M RUBASRI Vs. CHAIRMAN TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD; SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

Decided On June 26, 2014
M Rubasri Appellant
V/S
Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board; Superintending Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner is the appellant and her father, who was an employee of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, died in harness on 8.12.2001. The appellant/writ petitioner submitted an application seeking compassionate ground appointment on 11.8.2004, within a period of three years from the date of death of her father on 8.12.2001 and the said application was rejected on 5.11.2004, stating that she has not completed 18 years of age.

(2.) The appellant herein, after completing 18 years of age, submitted another application dated 12.9.2005 and since no orders came to be passed on the said application, filed W.P.No.4333 of 2006 praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to consider her case for compassionate ground appointment and it was allowed on 22.3.2006, by directing the respondents to consider the said application and pass orders, within a stipulated time and aggrieved by the same, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board filed an appeal in Writ Appeal No.1006 of 2006, vide judgment dated 18.9.2006, which was allowed on the ground that as per the scheme for compassionate ground appointment, in B.P.Ms.(FB)No.46, dated 13.10.1995, the application must be made within three years from the date of death of the deceased employee and a minor's application cannot be entertained.

(3.) The appellant herein completed Apprentice Training under the respondents herein and a certificate was also issued by the respondents on 22.4.2008. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board issued Board Proceedings in B.P.No.17, dated 1.11.2011 stating that the applications for compassionate ground appointment received within three years period prior to 23.8.2005 have to be construed as valid application even though the applicants were below 18 years of age, at that point of time, if they are otherwise eligible and pursuant to the said Board Proceedings, the appellant submitted a representation dated 15.11.2011.