IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 4507 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- M.GEETHA, CHATHALAMPATTU VADAKKUMKARA VEEDU, VEDIVACHANKOVIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, MANNUTHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, MANNUTHY P.O., THRISSUR DIST. 3. THE PROFESSOR AND HEAD, INSTRUCTIONAL FARM, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLAYANI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 4. NESAMMA, PARAVILAKOM PUTHEN VEEDU, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, KUZHAKKAT MURI, NEDUMKUZHI, POOVACHAL P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN,SC,KERALA AGRL.UTY FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.4507/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DT 15.6.99 AS NO.B8-919/99 DT 5.5.1999. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.K.DIS.B8-919/99 DT 17.7.99 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DT 18.9.99 SIGNED BYNESAMMA, GIRIJA, SUSEELA AND RAJENDRAN. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT 9.12.99 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/F1/51073/99 DT 20.9.07 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F3/2461/99 DT 23.11.2007 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 16.4.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 18.9.99 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 10.1.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT 8.6.07 ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT OF PALLICHAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF the ELCTORAL CARD OF THE FAMILY OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 4507 OF 2008 (J) ==================== Dated this the 26th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the daughter of late Sri.P.Stephen, who was a permanent labourer in Kerala Agricultural University, Instructional Farm at Vellayani in Thiruvananthapuram District. Sri.Stephen died in harness on 13.5.98. Thereafter, enclosing Ext.P2 legal heirship certificate and consent of other legal heirs of Stephen, petitioner submitted Ext.P8 application for appointment on compassionate grounds. Thereupon reply was given by Exts. P5 and P6. In Ext.P5, it is stated that the Stephen had earlier married Smt.Nesamma and that she is also a family pensioner following his death. It is stated that there is nothing on record to show that he had legally wedded second wife namely Smt.Madhavi, who gave birth to the petitioner. Yet another reason stated is that there was nothing to indicate that the deceased had legally divorced Smt.Nesamma. On receipt of Ext.P4, the same was communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P6 letter of the 3rd respondent. It is thereupon the writ petition is filed. The plea raised in Ext.P4 is reiterated in the statement filed on behalf of the respondents also. WPC 4507/08 :2 : 2. In my view, even if there is substance in what is contended on behalf of the respondents, in the peculiar facts of this case, there is no justification for denying the benefit of appointment on compassionate grounds to the petitioner. The reason being that Ext.P2 is the legal heirship certificate. Ext.P2 shows the name of the first wife as also the children in the second wife, namely Smt.Madhavi, which includes the petitioner also. Ext.P2 also shows that there are no issues in the first marriage. Ext.P3 is a document in which all the legal heirs who are mentioned in Ext. P2 have relinquished their claims in favour of the petitioner. Exts. P11 and P12 also justifies the correctness of Ext.P2. If that be so, the facts are clear that the first wife as also the other legal heirs in the second marriage have all given up their claim in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, in the absence of any rival claim for appointment on compassionate grounds, irrespective of the validity of the second marriage, I feel that the petitioner should be given the benefit of the scheme of appointment. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of quashing Exts.P5 and P6 and directing that the petitioner's candidature for appointment WPC 4507/08 :3 : under the scheme for compassionate appointment shall be considered and orders thereon shall be passed. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp