Allowed

Sri .Sai Samrat v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Dec 2022WP/100024/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a compassionate employment application filed by a minor petitioner. The Court held that under the amended Rule 5 of the 1996 Rules, the mother filed the application within the two-year window. The Court stayed the rejection order and directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner to a suitable post.

What did the court decide?

Stay of impugned endorsement dated 19.11.2021. Direction to appoint petitioner on compassionate grounds to a suitable post.

Sri .Sai Samrat Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 100024 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 100024 OF 2022 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI .SAI SAMRAT S/O. LATE K. MANJUNATH AGE 24 YEARS OCC. NIL R/O. 'TAI-KRUPA' T.B. ROAD TAGGINAKERE, HARIHARI-577601 TAL. HARIHAR, DIST. DAVANGERE

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD

¶12

(BY SRI. M S HARAVI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001

¶15

¶16

WP No. 100024 of 2022

¶17

THE DIRECTOR/ COMMISSIONER OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 9TH FLOOR, VISHWESHWRAIAH TOWER DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (URBAN DEVELOPEMENT CELL) HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI-581110

¶19

THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI-581110

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI V S KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3, SRI N P VIVEK MEHTA, ADVOCATE FOR R4, ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO 1.ISSUE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT NO.PUSA(1)/ SIBBANDI. VAHI.207/2014-15/912 DATED 19.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-J. 2.ISSUE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING HE RESPONDENTS TO APPOINT THE PETITIONER ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS TO THE POST SUITABLE TO HIS QUALIFICATION.

¶23

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B- GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

¶25

WP No. 100024 of 2022

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The father of the petitioner when working as Assistant Executive Engineer with the 4^th respondent – Municipal Council died on 9.12.2013. The mother of the petitioner filed an application to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground after he attained the age of majority. The application was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted an application within one year from the date of death of the father of the petitioner, against which, he filed WP No.33748/2016. The said writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an application afresh.

¶28

The 3^rd respondent again rejected the application reiterating that the application was submitted before attaining the age of majority, against which, this writ petition is filed.

¶29

I have considered the submissions of the learned

¶30

counsel appearing for the parties.

¶31

4 Rule 5 of Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 (for short `Rules, 1996’) has been amended w.e.f. 9.4.2021 , wherein it is specified that

¶32

¶33

WP No. 100024 of 2022

¶34

in case of a minor, he must have attained the age of eighteen years within two years from the date of death of the Government servant and he must make an application within two years thereafter. The father of the petitioner died on 9.12.2013. The mother of the petitioner filed an application on 4.12.2015 i.e. within two years from the date of death of the father of the petitioner. The application submitted by the mother of the petitioner was within the time specified under the amended proviso to Rule 5 of the Rules, 1996. Hence, the respondents are under an obligation to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointing the petitioner on compassionate ground in terms of the notification dated 12.9.1996. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶37

ii) The impugned endorsement dated 19.11.2021 issued by the 3^rd respondent vide Annexure-J is hereby stayed.

¶38

iii) The 3^rd respondent is hereby directed to appoint the

¶39

petitioner on compassionate ground to suitable post subject to petitioner satisfying other requirements of the Karnataka Civil

¶40

¶41

WP No. 100024 of 2022

¶42

Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶43

Sd/JUDGE

¶44

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 128

Sri .Sai Samrat v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri .Sai Samrat v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dandeli Mazdoor Sangh Vs the State of Karnataka

Prakash S/O Basappa Bambalawad Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Hiranyakeshi Sahakari Sakkare Vs Sidram Kallappa Kotagi

Miss.Chenguna Dattatrey Patil Vs the State of Karnataka by Its Secretary

Babajan S/O Gouse Modinsab Mujawar Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.M.a.Biradar Vs the State of Karnataka