Disposed¶39

Smt Alamelu v. Mysore Mahanagara Palike

Karnataka HC18 Dec 2025WP/34786/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate grounds appointment; death in harness 18.09.2008; widow petitioner vs Mysore Mahanagara Palike and its Deputy Commissioner; representation 11.11.2008 for minor son; endorsement 31.12.2008; application 29.06.2009 (Annexure-C); antecedent verification 28.04.2010; mandamus under Article 226; writ petition disposed of with direction to consider and pass order in accordance with law within 8 weeks; pending IAs disposed; Karnataka High Court, Justice Ashok S. Kinagi, 18.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider the petitioner's application/representation dated 29.06.2009 (Annexure-C) and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within 8 weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; pending IA(s) disposed of accordingly. ¶39

Smt Alamelu Vs Mysore Mahanagara Palike — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:54165 WP No. 34786 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 34786 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT ALAMELU W/O LATE JAVARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NO. 63, K.M. HALI, ARALIMARADA RASTE, NAZARABAD MOHALLA, MYSORE. 570024

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. C JAGADISH., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

MYSORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, BANUMAIAH COLLEGE, SAYYAJI RAO ROAD, AGRAHARA, CHAMARAJAPURA, MYSORE - 570024.

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BANUMAIAH COLLEGE, SAYYAJI RAO ROAD, AGRAHARA, CHAMARAJAPURA, MYSORE - 570024.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HEMANTH P., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. GEETHA DEVI M P., ADVOCATE)

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:54165 WP No. 34786 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER FOR ANY SUITABLE APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds as her husband passed away leaving behind the petitioner, and children.

¶25

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

¶26

2.1. The petitioner has submitted a representation

¶27

on 11.11.2008 seeking for appointment to her first son on compassionate grounds to the respondents, as her husband passed away on 18.09.2008 in harness. Respondent No.2 had issued an endorsement on

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:54165 WP No. 34786 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

31.12.2008 to the petitioner stating that the claim of the petitioner cannot be considered for the reason that her first son is minor. However, if an application is submitted by the petitioner, the same would be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds. Pursuant to the endorsement dated 31.12.2008, the petitioner has submitted another application dated 29.06.2009 seeking for an appointment on compassionate grounds. Respondent No.2 has addressed a communication dated 28.04.2010 to the Commissioner of Police, Mysuru City for verification of antecedent of the petitioner for providing an appointment on compassionate grounds. Respondent No.2 has not passed any order on the application submitted by the petitioner on 29.06.2009. Hence, this writ petition.

¶31

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, if reasonable time is granted, the respondents will consider the application/representation submitted by the

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:54165 WP No. 34786 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

petitioner vide Annexure-C, dated 29.06.2009 and would

¶35

pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶36

In view of the submission made by learned

¶37

counsel for the respondents, I proceed to pass the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i. The writ petition is disposed of ;

¶40

ii. The respondents are directed to consider the application/representation dated 29.06.2009 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-C, and would pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶41

iii. Pending IA(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

¶42

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶43

¶44

CT:KHV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11

Smt Alamelu v. Mysore Mahanagara Palike

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Alamelu v. Mysore Mahanagara Palike

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K T Thimmaiah Vs the Managing Director

Sri. Ravi S. Olekar, Vs Karnataka State Financial Corporation

Kum. Swetha Dsk Vs Chief General Manager

Smt H a Roopa Vs the Managing Director

Gopal Pandurang Gouda Patil, Vs the Union of India

Sri Naveen Vs the Chief Commissioner