IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2009 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34580 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUDHEESH PILLAI M.K./, S/O .LATE VIJAYAM PILLAI, AGED 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT MANADUKKAM, PANATHADI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.SANEESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTEMNT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER(HEALTH), KASARAGOD AT KANHANGAD, BALLA POST, ANANDASRAM, KASARAGOD-671 531. 4. MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, BANDADKA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.34580 OF 2009 (N) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's father Sri. Vijayan Pillai, while working as Nursing Assistant in the office of the fourth respondent, expired on 9.9.2005. Petitioner thereafter filed Ext.P3 application seeking employment on compassionate grounds. That is rejected by Ext.P11 on the ground that the petitioner is a married son. Counsel submits that the view taken in Ext.P11 is opposed to the principles laid down by this court and also IS in consistent with the stand taken by the first respondent itself in Ext.P12. As rightly pointed out by the counsel for the petitioners, in cases identical to this, this court has already taken THE view that marriage by itself will not deprive the candidates of their right to get appointment on compassionate ground.(see St. Ignatius High School V. State of Kerala (2005(3)KLT 1000), Ashkarali V. State of Kerala (2009(1)KLT SN 17 case No.18). Therefore Ext.P11 is set aside and the first respondent is directed to reconsider the matter, taking into account Ext.P12 and the dependency of the petitioner on the deceased, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. /2/ Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi JUDGE