IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2008 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 30076 of 2005(S) -------------------------- OA.584/2005 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. MARIAKUTTY SADANANDAN, W/O. LATE SRI.SADANANDAN, KALPAKAVADY, THEKKEMMURI, EAST KALLADA P.O., KOLLAM (DIST.) 2. VINOD S.ANAND, S/O. LATE SRI.SADANANDAN, KALPAKAVADY, THEKKEMMURI, EAST KALLADA P.O., KOLLAM (DIST.) BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,NEW DELHI 2. THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, KERALA GRADE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE, OFFICE OF THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE KOLLAM DIVISION, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BY THE FIRST PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 5.11.2002 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 21.7.2003 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE MINISTER OF COMMUNICATION,. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 26.7.2003 EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATION TO REVIEW THE MATTER DATED 18.8.2003 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FROM THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ADDRESSED TO O. RAJAGOPAL DATED 2.1.2004 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL DATED 4.8.2005 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. No. 30076 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair,J. Petitioners are challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal upholding the order of the second respondent whereby he has declined compassionate appointment to the second petitioner. The case of the petitioners is that first petitioner's husband died while in service and second petitioner, being the dependent son is entitled to employment on compassionate ground. However, on enquiry the Department found that the petitioners' family is financially well-off and does not come within the norms for compassionate employment. The Tribunal through detailed order found on facts that the findings are correct in as much as petitioners' family does not deserve any employment on compassionate ground. We do not find any ground to interfere with the findings of facts based on which 2 Tribunal confirmed the rejection of second petitioner's application. We therefore dismiss the WPC. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. kk 3