G.Vijaya Prasanna v. Union of India

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 27.09.2023 passed in O.A.No.1159 of 2021 is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

2.The Original Applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal is the writ petitioner before this Court. The father of the writ petitioner viz., Mr.K.Gajendran was working as telegraph man and expired on 13.12.2003, while he was in service. The Mother of the writ petitioner submitted a representation on 12.05.2004 seeking employment on compassionate grounds. In the year 2004, the applicant was engaged as a contract labourer and after completing a term of seven years, he was terminated from service. The department informed that he will be engaged on contract basis on seniority basis. Thereafter, on 19.03.2013 another application was submitted, seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. The said application was rejected. Thus the writ petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal.

3.The order of rejection passed by the department vide proceedings dated 22.03.2021 would show that the application submitted by the writ petitioner was placed before the High Power Committee for consideration. The High Power Committee after assessment awarded points. Twice assessment Page3 of 4 was made by the Committee. However, during the first assessment, the writ petitioner scored 18 net points and during the subsequent assessment, 53 marks were awarded. The cut off mark for consideration for compassionate appointment is 55. Since the respondent had not scored the eligible cut off mark, his case was not considered. Thus, the Committee concluded that on both counts, as per the old policy as well as the new policy, the family of the writ petitioner was not living in indigent condition, which warranted for appointment.

4.The Central Administrative Tribunal elaborately considered the terms and conditions of the scheme along with the assessment made by the High Power Committee and rejected the application.

5.In view of the above position, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 27.09.2023 in O.A.No.1159 of 2021, consequently, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 07-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order sai Page4 of 4 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND N.SENTHILKUMAR J. sai To

1.Union of India Rep By Its Assistant General Manager (Per-IV), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL), Govt. of India Enterprises, 5th Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110 001

2.The High Power Committee Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, New Delhi

3.The Assistant General Manager (Estt) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Chennai Telephones, No.89, Millers Road, Chennai-600 010

4.The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai-600 104 07-07-2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR G.Vijaya Prasanna S/o.Late K.Gajendran, No.12, Nethaji Nagar, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai-600 016 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Union Of India Rep By Its Assistant General Manager (Per- IV), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd(bsnl), Govt. of India Enterprises, 5th Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110 001 2. The High Power Committee Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, New Delhi 3. The Assistant General Manager (Estt) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Chennai Telephones, No.89, Millers Road, Chennai-600 010 4. The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai-600 104 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench the 4th respondent herein in O.A.No.1159/2021 dated 27.09.2023 and quash the same and further directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground. For Petitioner(s): Ms.A.Aarthi For Respondent(s): Ms.Sunitha Kumari, Standing Counsel for R1to R3 Page2 of 4 R4-Tribunal