IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.49874 OF 2019 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
M. SOUMYA D/O MANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, TADAGA COLONY, SHIVANI RAILWAY STATION, SHIVANI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT-577549. (BY SRI.S.P.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . THE DIRECTOR, K.P.T.C.L, (GOVERNMENT & HUMAN RESOURCE) CORPORATE OFFICE, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.
2 . THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), K.P.T.C.L, TRANSMISSION LINE AND SUB STATION DIVISION, SHANTH MANON, 2ND FLOOR, GANDHINAGARA MAIN ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA-577202 3 . THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), K.P.T.C.L, T. L & S. S DIVISION, B. H. ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA-577 203.
4 . ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELC) K.P.T.C.L M.U.S.S. AJJAMPURA-577 547, ... PETITIONER TARIKERE TALUK, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT.
5 . ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V) NODAL CENTRE, K.P.T.C.L, TARIKERE, TARIKERE TALUK, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 549.
... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 25.09.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-N BEING ARBITRARY ERRONEOUS AND OPPOSED TO LAW IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO DIRECTING FOR APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OFFICE ATTENDER GRADE II WHEN SHE WAS QUITE ELIGIBLE AND QUALIFIED TO GET HIGHER POST AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner’s claim for appointment to a higher post based upon the arguable higher qualification is hit by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANOTHER VS. SHASHI KUMAR, (2019) 3 SCC 653, wherein it is held that the compassionate appointment is only for the purpose of mitigating hardship of the family of the employer dying in harness suffers and not for anything else. The Court observed that:
“Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule that appointment to any public post in the service of the state has to be made on the basis of principles which accord with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Dependants of a deceased employee of the State are made eligible by virtue of the policy on a compassionate appointment. The basis of the policy is that it recognizes that a family of a deceased employee may be placed in a position fo financial hardship upon the untimely death of the employee while in service. It is the immediacy of the need which furnishes the basis for the State to allow the benefit of compassionate appointment. The terms on which such applications would be considered are subject to the policy which is framed by the State. In that sense, it is a well- settled principle of law that there is no right to compassionate appointment.”
In the above circumstances, no grievance is made out.
Therefore, the writ petition is rejected in limine.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE DS