IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2009 / 1ST POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37142 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ S. MATHALAI MUTHU, S/O. SUBRAMANI, CHUNNAMPUKAL THODU, OLH COLONY, VADAKARAPATHY, VELENTHAVALAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 37142 OF 2009 (K) ===================== Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that his father was a peon in the Puthur Grama Panchayat of Palakkad District. His father expired on 5/10/2002 and thereupon the petitioner submitted an application for the employment on compassionate grounds. By Ext.P6 proceedings, his application has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is a married son. It is challenging this order, the writ petition is filed. 2. This court has been consistent in holding that marriage of a dependent by itself will not disable him from seeking employment on compassionate grounds. See in this background the judgments in Rev.Mother Delphine Mary v. State of Kerala (2002(1) KLT 137) and St.Ignatious High School v. State of Kerala (2005(3) KLT 1000) and the judgment dated 11.11.2008 in WP(C) No.31863/08. 3. Since in Ext.P6, rejection is only on the ground of marriage, in the light of the judgments referred to above, the order is unsustainable. For that reason Ext.P6 will stand set aside. WPC 37142/09 :2 : The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for employment under compassionate grounds in the light of the judgments referred to above and duly adverting to the dependency factor. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp