Kumari Sangeetha T R Vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14950 WP No. 13233 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 13233 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KUMARI SANGEETHA T.R. D/O. LATE SRI. RANGANATHA SWAMY @ RANGANATHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT SANGEETHA NILAYA, OPPOSITE TO VIDHYA MOTORS, SHETTIHALLI MAIN ROAD, MARUTHINAGARA, TUMAKURU-572102

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. CHITHAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT) CAUVERY BHAVAN BANGALORE-560 009.

¶13

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) (COM.O & M) BESCOM TUMKUR DIVISION OFFICE OPP. KEB CHOWLTRY, HORAPETE, TUMAKURU, PIN-572101.

¶14

ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC) BESCOM NITTUR C.O AND M SUB-DIVISION SANTHEPET, NITTUR TUMAKURU, PIN-572102 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. THARANGINI M.S., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3)

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14950 WP No. 13233 of 2024

¶16

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT COMPANY TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER FOR EMPLOYMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND ON ACCOUNT OF THE DEATH OF FATHER OF THE PETITIONER-LATE SRI RANGANATHASWAMY AND ETC.

¶17

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

The petitioner has challenged an endorsement dated 15.12.2023, issued by the respondent No.1 by which, her application for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected.

¶20

The father of the petitioner, who was employed as an Assistant Lineman with the respondent No.1, died on 21.04.2014 while in service and the petitioner was then a minor. After nearly three years from the date of attaining the age of majority, she submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds. The said application was rejected by the respondent No.2 in terms of the impugned endorsement on the ground that her mother was already employed as a

¶21

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14950 WP No. 13233 of 2024

¶22

teacher in a government school. It was also stated in the said endorsement that there were no dependants of the deceased employee who were eligible to be appointed on compassionate grounds within a year from the date of commencement of Karnataka Electricity Board Recruitment (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) (Amendment) Regulations, 2011.

¶23

Being aggrieved by the said endorsement, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was born on 18.12.2001 and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to file an application within one year from the date of attaining the age of majority i.e., in the year 2020. He contends that the ground on which the application is rejected is thoroughly perverse, in as much as, the petitioner was entitled to claim the appointment on compassionate ground on the death of her father.

¶25

A perusal of the impugned endorsement shows that

¶26

the mother of the petitioner was already employed as a teacher in the Government school. The father of the petitioner died on

¶27

4 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:14950 WP No. 13233 of 2024

¶29

21.04.2014 and as per the regulations in force relating to compassionate appointment, the petitioner did not attain the majority within one year from the date of death of her father.

¶30

Consequently, the impugned endorsement issued by the respondent No.2 is just and proper and does not call for interference. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

¶31

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶32

HJ

¶33

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Kumari Sangeetha T R v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Sangeetha T R v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishwanath S K Vs the State of Karnataka

K.R. Shreyanka Vs Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director

Ramesh Parameshwararappa Patil Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Mayanna Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. H. Rebecca Nesamani Vs the Government of Karnataka

Sri. Nagesh C. R. Vs State of Karnataka