This writ challenge to a rejection of compassionate appointment was dismissed by this court. Rule 6 of the Karnataka Civil Service (Appointment) on Compassionate Grounds Rules, 1996, was held to bar appointment for daily wage workers.
Writ petition dismissed for lack of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.11303/2018 (S - RES)
BETWEEN
VENKATARAMANAPPA S/O LATE GANGULAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT 1105, 6TH CROSS, KALASTHRI NAGARA, T.DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 057.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI S.N.BHAT, ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
AND
2
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP), DASARAHALLI ZONE,. BAGALUGUNTE, BENGALURU – 560 073.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.S.GAUTHAM, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VIDEO CONFERENCING);
R2 AND R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 11.12.2012 VIDE ANNX-H ISSUED BY THE R-3 ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition has sought to
quash the endorsement dated 11.12.2012 – Annexure
H, by which, the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds was turned down.
are as follows:
3
The father of the petitioner, one Sri Gangulappa was appointed as Pourakarmika on daily wage basis with effect from 01.09.1979 at Chokkasandara Panchayath, which later on came to be merged with Bagalugunte panchayath to form a new City Municipal Council namely, Dasarahalli City Municipal Council. The father of the petitioner continued to work as Pourakarmika on daily wages at Dasarahalli City Municipal Council.
1989, the State Government passed an order to regularise the services of Pourakarmikas, who had put in 10 years of continuous services along with other terms and conditions in the order. Pursuant to the aforestated Government Order, the Dasarahalli City Municipal Council recommended the names of few Pourakarmikas who have completed 10 years of service by the time the Government Order was issued.
4
Dasarahalli City Municipal Council, the name of the father of the petitioner was at serial No.2. During the pendency of the approval of the list sent by the City Municipal Council, the father of the petitioner died on 01.10.1996, that is, before any decision could be taken upon the regularization of the services of the father of the petitioner as Pourakarmika.
the petitioner who was working along with his father, during his service, as a casual labourer on contract basis, gave a representation long after the death of the father of the petitioner on 25.10.2008 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds contending that the father of the petitioner had died in harness. The petitioner claims to have given plethora of representations later on to all the Authorities in the
5
State Government seeking appointment on
compassionate grounds.
petitioner and Sri B.S.Gautham, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.
6
8. Admittedly, the father of the petitioner was
appointed on daily wages in the year 1979 and continued to be working on daily wages till he died on 01.10.1996. Though there was a recommendation made by the Town Municipal Council to the Government for regularization of the employees who had completed ten years of service on daily wages as Pourakarmikas, which contained the name of the petitioner’s father, even before any order could be passed by the Government accepting the recommendations of the Town Municipal Council, his father died. Hence, the father of the petitioner never became a regular employee during his lifetime.
7
by way of its adoption by the Palike. Sub-rule 5 of Rule 6 of the said Rules reads as follows:
“(5) The appointment under these rules shall not be made in the case of the dependent of a deceased person who at the time of death was on re-employment or was employed as local candidate, Stipendiary Graduate or Daily Wage worker or employed in any work charged establishment or on Casual employment.”
Thus, in terms of the afore-extracted Rule, the petitioner would not be entitled even for a consideration of his case for appointment on
compassionate grounds.
8
lacks merit and is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
nvj CT:MJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petitioner claiming compassionate appointment is ineligible when the deceased parent was a daily wage worker at the time of death.
Venkataramanappa S/o Late Gangulappa
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
M. Nagaprasanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
