IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.7.2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Writ Appeal No.881 of 2009 V.S.Venkatesan .. Appellant/Petitioner vs. 1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai. 2. Director of Rural Development, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai-15. 3. The District Collector, Villupuram District. 4. The Commissioner, Melmalayanoor Panchayat, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District. .. Respondents/Respondents Writ Appeal against the order dated 18.4.2009 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.6981 of 2009 on the file of this Court. Writ Petition presented to this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing in the respondent to provide appointment an compasionate Grounds to the petitioner. For appellant : Mr.K.Vasudevan For respondents : Mr.D.Srinivasan, Addl.G.P. Judgment (The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.J.Mukhopadhaya,J) Smt.Subbulakshmi Ammal, the mother of the appellant-writ petitioner, was appointed as Maternity Assistant of Melmalaynoor Panchayat, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District and she expired on 17.8.1979, leaving behind her husband Mr.K.V.S.Mani, aged 46 years, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Mr.K.V.Sekar, son, aged 16 years and the other son—Mr.K.V.Venkatesan (the appellant herein), aged 13 years. The appellant, having not been granted compassionate appointment, preferred Writ Petition in 2009 (W.P.No.6981 of 2009), which was dismissed by the impugned order on 18.4.2009. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-writ petitioner submitted that there was no laches on the part of the appellant, but the respondents-authorities all the time, asked one or other document, which was obtained and supplied to them, but after a long number of years, they rejected the prayer recently on the ground that the application seeking for compassionate appointment, was beyond three years from the date of the death of the mother of the appellant. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned single Judge failed to notice the fact that there is no delay on the part of the appellant, and that similarly situated persons have been employed in view of one or other guideline issued by the State Government. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-State submitted that after long delay, no relief can be granted to the appellant. 4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 5. From the records, it would be evident that the mother of the appellant-writ petitioner died 30 years back on 17.8.1979. The appellant-writ petitioner was aged about 13 years at that time and thereby, he was not eligible for appointment. Three years is the limitation period prescribed for filing such application for compassionate appointment. But, after five years, when the appellant attained majority (18 years), he was not entitled to apply, three years having expired on 17.8.1982. 6. So far as the Writ Petition is concerned, it was filed in the year 2009 after 30 years of the death of the mother of the appellant, and therefore, no relief could also be granted by the Writ Court for appointment on compassionate grounds after 30 years of the death of the mother of the appellant-writ petitioner. 7. We find no merits in the Writ Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. cs Sd/- Asst.Registrar /True Copy/ Sub.Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai. 2. Director of Rural Development, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai-15. 3. The District Collector, Villupuram District. 4. The Commissioner, Melmalayanoor Panchayat, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District. + 1 cc to Government Pleader CC SR.34931. Writ Appeal No.881 of 2009 MBS(CO) EU 7.8.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/