IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 5174 of 2009(N) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- JAFEEK KHAN M, S/O.MOHAMMED SALIH RAWTHER, JAFEEK BHAVAN, CHUNAKARA SOUTH, CHARUMOOD P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV.MR.S.SUBHASH CHAND RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, CORPORATE OFFICE, BHADRATHA, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED, CORPORATE OFFICE, BHADRATHA, THRISSUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN ADVS. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R2 & R3 MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR R2 & R3 MR.K.JOHN MATHAI FOR R2 & R3 MR.P.BENNY THOMAS FOR R2 & R3 MR.ANIL D. NAIR FOR R2 & R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.5174 of 2009 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of the application for appointment under the Dying in harness scheme. His mother was in the service of the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited, which is a Kerala Government undertaking. While she was working as Special Grade Assistant in the Charummood Brach of the second respondent, she died in harness on 12.3.2008. 2. It is pointed out that petitioner has one sister Smt.Jasmin N., who has already married and residing along with her husband. The petitioner has passed S.S.L.C Examination and completed Vocational Higher Secondary course in the School, at Chunakkara. Thereafter, he had undergone Diploma Course in Automobile Engineering at N.I.Polytechnic, Thakkala, Nagarcoil. His father is a pensioner and he retired from service as Sub Inspector of Police. It is also pointed out that he was not having any employment and was fully depending upon his mother, as the monthly pension of his father was not even adequate to meet the bare needs of the family members. In the above circumstances, it was decided that the petitioner should marry a girl, who would be able to attend the family needs and also to render able support and assistance to his ailing mother. Accordingly, he married one Ms.Sheena. WPC/5174 OF 2009 2 3.The petitioner approached respondents 2 and 3 for employment assistance under the dying in harness scheme. Ext.P2 is the communication issued by the third respondent to his father directing him to submit application in the prescribed form along with the requisite documents. Ext.P3 is a scheme for compassionate employment of dependents of Government servants who die in harness which was modified by first respondent as per the direction issued by this Hon'ble Court in various judgments including judgment in OP No.10287 of 2005. The petitioner's application stands rejected as per Ext.P6, on the reason that a married son is not eligible. For arriving at the said conclusion they relied upon another order passed by the Government as per Ext.P7 in respect of different applicant. The main reason stated therein is that married son is not dependant on his parents. It is accordingly held that the married son/married daughter will not come in the scheme itself. 4. The petitioner contends in the light of Exts.P4 and P5 Government letters issued in the matter, a married son/married daughter is also be considered for the benefit of compassionate employment scheme. The above issue have been considered in the recent judgment of this Court in Ashkarali v. State of Kerala (2009 (1) KLT) SN 17 . It is held that irrespective of marriage, the son or daughter of the deceased employee may have been dependent on the WPC/5174 OF 2009 3 deceased employee, and that, while marriage may change the status of the son/daughter, his or her status as a dependent son or dependent daughter may continue. The mere fact that the son/daughter got married by itself will not indicate that he/she is not eligible for appointment under the Compassionate Employment Scheme. The reasons stated in Ext.P7, cannot be supported. 5. In the light of Exts.P4 and P5 and in the light of the dictum laid down in Ashkarali v. State of Kerala (2009 (1) KLT) SN 17 the view taken in Ext.P6 cannot be accepted as the correct one. Therefore Ext.P6 is quashed. The application will have to be considered in accordance with the scheme. The writ petition is allowed as above and appropriate orders by respondents 2 and 3 will be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE