IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 780 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.8547/2007 Dated 09/10/2007 .................... APPELLANT: 5TH RESPONDENT ------------------------- SMT.V.RAJESWARI, W/O.U.RAVI, 10/392, RAMANATHAPURAM, PALAKKAD NOW WORKING AS TEACHER, BHARATHA MATHA HIGHER SECONDARY, CHANDRANAGAR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS 1- 4 & RESPONDENTS 1 -4 & 6 ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER, C.A.HIGH SCHOOL, PERUVAMBA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. M.ANWAR SADATH, PEON, C.A.HIGH SCHOOL, PERUVAMBA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. S.DIVAKARAN, S/O.SIVARAMAN, FULL TIME MENIAL, C.A.HIGH SCHOOL, PERUVAMBA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. MRS.K.A.BALKIS, D/O.ABDUL MAJEED, FULL TIME MENIAL, C.A.HIGH SCHOOL, PERUVAMBA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. 6. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. WA 780/08 2 7. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. K.M.UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.C.V.KESAVAN, AMBADI, AISHWARYA NAGAR, PUTHUNAGARAM, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. 9. AJAY V.B., PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER, C.A.HIGH SCHOOL, PERUVAMBA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ABRAHAM R5 TO R7 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.SANDESH RAJA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== W.A.No.780 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy,J. The appellant in this case applied for employment on compassionate ground as her mother died on 12.7.2000. At the time of the death of her mother, she was employed and married to an officer in the Insurance Company who was getting more than Rs.10,000/- as salary. Even though a married daughter can be termed as a dependent for employment on compassionate ground, it should be proved that she was actually a dependent on the deceased at the time of death. She was employed at the time of death of her mother and was married to an officer and she cannot be termed as a dependent of the deceased employee on the facts of this case. Apart from that other reason stated is that the learned single Judge has given ample reason in justifying the denial of the claim for employment to the appellant in the vacancy of her mother. The learned single Judge also considered -: 2 :- the entire matter. We find no merit in the Writ Appeal and the Writ Appeal is dismissed. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 27/5