Writ petition challenging rejection of compassionate appointment application filed by a married daughter. Court dismissed petition on merits after finding family did not meet conditions of financial distress required by statutory rules.
Writ Petition dismissed with costs having been made easy.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:7243-DB WP No. 21617 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT PETITION NO. 21617 OF 2022 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NANDINI A T, W/O HARISH, D/O MEENAKSHI.K, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O VEMANAGARA, CHALLAKERE GATE, CHITRADURGA-577 536.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(BY SRI.KHAMROZ KHAN., AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.09.2022 PASSED IN APPLICATION NUMBER 193/2022 BY KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL VIDE ANNEXURE - C AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION AND B. GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEM FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, KRISHNA S. DIXIT.J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petition by a married daughter of an employee dying in harness, seeks to lay a challenge to the Tribunal’s
order dated 14.09.2022 whereby her application No.193/2022 calling in question the denial of
compassionate appointment has been turned down.
“The Petitioner is given a period of one week for filing an affidavit as to what is the total amount received as the terminal benefits of employee who died in harness. In addition he/she shall also state the income of her marital family such as properties holding both movable & immovable, Bank deposits, shares etc.,
Heavy adverse inference may be drawn if such an affidavit is not filed on the next date of hearing.
Post this matter for Further Hearing on 13.02.2024.”
Accordingly, the Petitioner has sworn to an affidavit and filed it on 21.2.2024.
husband is admittedly a Group ‘C’ officer in the Forest Department drawing attractive pay package; Petitioner being member of matrimonial family and the said family not being in distress on account of employee’s death in harness, the impugned order cannot be faltered. He further contends that the Rules providing for compassionate appointment of married daughters came to be notified only on 9.4.2021 i.e., much after 3.5.2020 i.e., the date of death. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition.
(a) Petitioner’s mother died in harness on 3.5.2020, is not in dispute; Petitioner has been married and has been residing in the matrimonial family is also not in dispute; in her affidavit at para 8, she has said as under:
“I state that, my husband is working as Deputy Range Forest Officer, who is a C-Group
Employee in the pay scale of Rs.25,800/-. Apart from the salaried income, there is no other income. My husband has to take care of his aged parents. A Copy of the salary slip of my husband is produced herewith Document No.4. ”
(b) Petitioner’s husband, an officer in the State
Government is drawing a gross salary of Rs.41,644/- in the pay band of Rs.25,800 – Rs.57,400/-. Petitioner’s father owns property and his sisters have filed a partition suit in O.S.No.297/2022 that is pending in the court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chitradurga, is also admitted in para 7 of the affidavit. However, the particulars of these properties involved in the suit are not stated and the court is at loss to know why they are not disclosed. This apart, Petitioner’s husband has a balance of Rs.1,95,626/- in his S.B. Account No.64130978144 in State Bank of India, Chitradurga, as on 8.2.2024. Be that as it may.
(c) Learned AGA appearing for the Respondents is more than justified in contending that with the asset & money holding of Petitioner’s family as above, and attractive employment position of her husband, there is
absolutely no room for the plea of distress of the family,
on account of death of its breadwinner. After all, the compassionate appointment is an apology to the rule of equality, in the matter of public employment and still it is provided to tide over family’s difficulty arising out of death of its breadwinner in harness. A Coordinate Bench of this
Court in MRS.MEGA J vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA (LIC) , 2023 NCKHC 35178, at para 5, has observed as under:
“5. It hardly needs to be stated that the appointment on compassionate ground avails as an exception to the rule of equality enacted in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court in Bank of Baroda vs. Baljit Singh 2023 SCC OnLine SC 745 has reiterated that the compassionate appointment is a concession and therefore, cannot be claimed as a matter of right; the job aspirants on this ground need to satisfy the criteria laid down in the extant rules/schemes. Added, the right to claim such appointment is conditioned by the fact that the family of the employee dying in harness is in financial distress and therefore, needs to be tided over…”
(d) There is force in the submission of learned AGA
that the law as obtaining on the date the application for compassionate appointment is considered should be kept
in view. Admittedly, the death of employee in harness occurred on 3.5.2020, the subject Rules namely Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996, came to be amended vide Notification dated 9.4.2021. They have enlarged the definition of family, is true. However, one of the conditions which is stipulated in this definition vide amended Rule 2(b)(ii) reads as under:
“ in the case of the deceased female married Government Servant her son, daughter (unmarried/married/divorced/widowed) and widower who were dependent upon her and were living with her. ”
This requirement is not complied with even in the least. The contention that the benefit of these Rules should be given to the Petitioner cannot be accepted except by manhandling the same and that cannot be done by the Courts to suit the requirement of a particular individual, especially when the same partakes the character of a Policy matter.
NC: 2024:KHC:7243-DB WP No. 21617 of 2022
In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition being
devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is, costs having been made easy.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
Bsv/cbc List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment as a married daughter despite general financial stability of the family.
Whether the exclusion of a married daughter from compassionate appointment violates the equality provisions of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
MRS.MEGA J vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA (LIC)Distinguished¶48
MRS.MEGA J vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA (LIC), 2023 NCKHC 35178
Bank of Baroda vs. Baljit SinghReferred¶49
Bank of Baroda vs. Baljit Singh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 745 · Who else cites this
Smt. NANDINI A T
STATE OF KARNATAKA
Krishna S Dixit
G Basavaraja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
