The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Monday set aside the Tamil Nadu government's decision to grant compassionate government jobs to the families of 41 people who lost their lives in the Karur stampede in September 2025. The Court held that while the tragedy deserved sympathy and support, public employment could not be distributed outside the constitutional framework governing recruitment.
A Division Bench comprising Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice R. Sakthivel ruled that the appointments violated the principles of equality and equal opportunity guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court consequently quashed the Government Order providing the appointments.
Background of the Case
The case arose after the Tamil Nadu government decided to offer government jobs on compassionate grounds to the families of the 41 persons who died during a stampede at a Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) public rally in Karur in September 2025. The incident is currently under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The decision was challenged before the High Court by petitioner Theeran Thirumurugan @ Thirumurugan, who argued that compassionate appointments are ordinarily reserved for dependants of government employees who die while in service. According to the petition, extending the benefit to victims of a public tragedy without a uniform policy would violate constitutional guarantees relating to public employment.
The petitioner also pointed out that the affected families had already received ex gratia compensation and contended that government employment could not be granted through executive discretion alone.
The State defended its decision by describing it as a humanitarian policy measure intended to support families that had suddenly lost their earning members. It also relied on past instances where employment had been provided following exceptional tragedies.
Court Observations
The Bench observed that public employment carries constitutional obligations and cannot be treated as a form of general financial relief.
“The appointments are in direct violation of the guarantee available to every citizen under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution,” the Bench observed while explaining that equal opportunity in public service cannot be bypassed through executive action.
The Court noted that several dependants of government employees who died while in service were already waiting for compassionate appointments under the existing scheme. Ignoring those pending claims while creating a separate category for stampede victims, the Bench said, would be inconsistent with the constitutional principles governing recruitment.
The judges further clarified that although the State had invoked its executive powers under Article 162 of the Constitution, those powers must always operate within constitutional limits.
“Exercise of executive power must be within the constitutional limits. If executive action were left unfettered, chaos will reign,” the Bench remarked.
The Court also expressed concern that approving such appointments in one public tragedy could lead to similar demands in numerous other unfortunate incidents, including industrial accidents, road accidents, or disasters where lives are lost.
Court Suggests Alternative Rehabilitation
While setting aside the appointments, the Bench recognised the need to provide meaningful assistance to the affected families.
The judges suggested that instead of offering government jobs, the State could sponsor technical education, vocational training, or entrepreneurship programmes for eligible members of the victims' families.
“We wonder why the government could not have extended training in skills and entrepreneurship for deserving members of the families,” the Court observed, adding that such support could help create self-sufficient individuals capable of generating employment for others in the future.
The Bench also emphasised that public employment should remain a merit-based opportunity governed by constitutional norms.
“Public employment is not to be thrown away by the State. It has to be earned. Its value has to be realised,” the Court said.
Earlier Interim Order
During earlier proceedings on July 10, 2026, the High Court had permitted the State to issue appointment orders but made it clear that the appointments would remain temporary and subject to the final outcome of the case. The Court had also directed that no beneficiary should receive the first salary before the petitions were finally decided.
Court's Decision
After considering the rival submissions, the Madurai Bench held that the Government Order granting compassionate appointments to the families of the Karur stampede victims could not be sustained under the Constitution.
The Court ruled that public employment must strictly comply with the guarantees of equality and equal opportunity under Articles 14 and 16 and therefore quashed the appointments.
Case Details
Case Title: Theeran Thirumurugan @ Thirumurugan v. The Chief Secretary
Case Number: WP(MD) No. 19539 of 2026
Judge: Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice R. Sakthivel
Decision Date: July 27, 2026
