IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34880 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R. SIVAKUMAR, SARALA BHAVAN, MARUTHANKUZHY, KANJIRAMPARA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF P & ARD, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No. 34880 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 10th day of December 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Kaleeswaram Raj, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner's father was a Villageman in the Revenue Department. He died while in service on 6.10.2005. Claiming appointment under the dying in harness scheme, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application dated 12.4.2006 before the Tahsildar, Chirayinkeezhu in whose office his father was employed. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that notwithstanding repeated representations, final orders have not been passed on Ext.P2 application by the competent authority, viz. the State Government. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits on instructions received from the second respondent that no decision has been taken on the application submitted by the petitioner for compassionate appointment. The petitioner's father passed away on 6.10.2005. He applied for compassionate appointment in the year 2006 as per Ext.P2 application dated 12.4.2006 The very purpose of providing employment under the compassionate appointment scheme will be defeated, if the applications in that regard are kept pending W.P.(C)No.34880/2008 2 for unduly long period. It is stated that as the petitioner is the married son of the deceased employee, he is not eligible to be appointed under the dying in harness scheme. 4. Ext.P14 indicates that the petitioner got married on 30.10.2005, after his father passed away on 6.10.2005. Therefore on the date on which his father passed away, the petitioner was an unmarried son. Further a Division Bench of this Court has in Rev.Mother Delphine Mary v State of Kerala and others [2002 (1) KLJ 53] held that the married sons/daughters are also entitled to be considered for appointment under the dying in harness scheme, if they show that notwithstanding the factum of the marriage, they were dependent on the deceased employee. Further, the Secretary to Government, General Education Department has in Government Letter No.61701/J3/2000/G.Edn. dated 6.1.2001 sent to the Director of Public Instruction clarified that married son/daughter can also be considered for appointment under the compassionate scheme, if they are otherwise eligible. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of the Division Bench of this Court in Rev.Mother Delphine Mary v State of Kerala and others (supra) and the view taken by the Government themselves in the aforesaid letter dated 6.1.2001, the petitioner's application has to be considered by the Government on its merits. W.P.(C)No.34880/2008 3 In the result, I dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the Government to take a final decision on Ext.P2 application on the merits, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to prove that notwithstanding his marriage, he was dependent on his father at the time of his death. Final orders on Ext.P2 shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/