IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2010 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15643 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHABINA K.P., D/O.KUNHIRAMAN K.P. AGED 28 YEARS, KIZHAKKEPURAYIL, NALILAMBKANDAM, VALIYAPOIL P.O, CHERUVATHUR VIA, KASARAGODE 671 313. BY ADV. SRI.K.SANEESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT,GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, POST VIDYNAGAR, KASARGODE 671 123. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 15643 OF 2010 (E) ===================== Dated this the 21st day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge is against Exts.P2, P6 and P7, whereby, request of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that she is a married sister of the deceased Government servant. 2. Facts show that the petitioner's elder brother Sri.Shibu K.P, who was a peon in the Taluk Supply Office, Hosdurg expired on 16/10/2005. On his death, petitioner submitted Exts.P1 and P1 (a) applications, which is now declined by the aforesaid orders. 3. In various cases of this nature, this Court had taken the view that what is relevant is not whether the applicant is married or not, but as to whether at the time of death, the applicant was dependant on the deceased. The impugned orders show that the question of dependency has not been examined by the authorities while rejecting the claim of the petitioner and the only aspect that has been taken into account is that the petitioner is a married person. 4. In my view, having regard to the above, the impugned WPC No. 15643/10 :2 : orders Exts.P2, P6 and P7 cannot be sustained. Therefore, these orders are quashed and the 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner duly adverting to the question as to whether the petitioner was a dependent of the deceased at the time of death. The matter shall be considered and orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp