IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19496 of 2009(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MANOHARAN.K.,PATTAMANA KIZHAKKETHIL, UDAYEMPEROOR P.O.,ERNAKULAM-682 307, U.D.CLERK,RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF THE ASST.DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER (GENERAL), KAKKANAD,ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS.MR.V.G.ARUN MR.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, LMS COMPOUND,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 19496 of 2009 -F ------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner's father was a Government servant who died while in service on 23.8.1966. On application submitted by the petitioner during the year 1995 he was appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the Rural Development Department as per G.O(MS) No.195/2000/LSGD dated 10.7.2000. The petitioner accepted the said appointment. His probation in the category of Lower Division Clerk was declared and he was also promoted to the category of Upper Division Clerk. After the petitioner was thus appointed he moved the Government seeking appointment in a higher post. That request was rejected by the Government by Exts.P5, P7 and P9 orders, which are under challenge in this writ petition. The fact that the petitioner was given appointment under the dying-in-harness scheme is not in dispute. He seeks appointment in a higher post, taking note of his educational qualifications. The Apex Court has in State of Hariyana V. Naresh Kumar Bali (1994(4) SCC 448 and State of Rajasthan V. Umrao Singh (1994(6) SCC 560) held that once the right to be appointed under the compassionate appointment scheme has been consummated any further or second consideration for W.P(C) No. 19496 of 2009 -F 2 appointment to higher post on the ground of compassion does not arise. In the instant case what the petitioner seeks is appointment to the higher post under the compassionate appointment scheme. Para 25 of Ext.P10 also stands in the way of the petitioner seeking a change of category after the appointment is made. The claim made by the petitioner is in my opinion plainly untenable. In the light of the terms and stipulations in Ext.P10 and the decisions of the Apex Court referred to above, this writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE //True Copy// PA to Judge ab W.P(C) No. 19496 of 2009 -F 3