IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2009 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 27719 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RESHMI KRISHNAN.R.S, AGED 27 YRS., D/O.D.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, RADHIKA BHAVANAM, MARUTHORVATTOM P.O., CHERTHALA, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. AUTOKAST LTD., S.N.PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. STEEL INDUSTRIALS KERALA LTD., ATHANI P.O., SILK NAGAR, TRICHUR-680 771, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) FOR R1 SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.27719 OF 2009 (H) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims an appointment under the first respondent on compassionate grounds. 2. Her father Sri. D.Radhakrishna Pillai was an employee of the first respondent. He expired on 1.10.2002 and according to the petitioner, she sought appointment by making Ext.P4 application. It is stated that despite the availability of vacancies her claim was not considered by the respondent and therefore the writ petition is filed praying for orders requiring the respondent to appoint him. 3. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit. According to the first respondent, though initially it was a subsidiary of the 2nd respondent, it is since been delinked from the holding company. It is stated that it is a sick unit and reference has been made to BIFR and the proceedings are pending. It is also stated that as part of the restructuring process, the company has entered into a joint venture with the Railways and that the joint venture agreement is being implemented. It is WPC.No.27719 /09 :2 : stated that in the meanwhile company has been reducing its manpower and substantial number of the employees have already availed voluntary retirement and that the vacancies cannot be filled up by fresh appointments. That apart, according to the Ist respondent, in Ext.R1(a) Government have directed that pending cases of appointment under Compassionate Employment Scheme cannot be considered in view of the joint venture with the Indian Railways. Therefore, according to the first respondent not only that there is no vacancies but even otherwise, appointments cannot be made in view of Ext.R1(a) Government Order referred to above. In addition to this it is also stated that 22 claims for appointments made by the dependents of employees who died prior to the date of the death of the petitioner's father , are still not considered. For all these reasons it is stated that the claim of the petitioner cannot be accepted. 4. If as stated by the Ist respondent, there is a conscious decision not to make appointments, the petitioner cannot compel the company to appoint him. Even otherwise, there is no material to show that the contention of the company that there is no vacancy available is incorrect. In such circumstances, this court WPC.No.27719 /09 :3 : will not be justified in directing the first respondent, a sick industrial company to make appointment on the compassionate ground. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. This judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner raising his claim when the situation improves. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No.27719 /09 :4 :