IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R.DEVDAS WRIT PETITION No.12814/2018 (S-RES) BETWEEN LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE T.PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT BHOVI COLONY, KILARI PETE, HOSKOTE TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.C. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009 3. THE DIRECTOR THE DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.
4. THE COMMISSIONER, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSKOTE TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. M.S. PRATHIMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. P.N. NANJA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-4 VIDE ANNEXURE-P TO THE WRIT PETITION; DIRECT THE R-4 TO RELEASE ALL THE TERMINAL BENEFITS OF THE DECEASED T.PRAKASH IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE; DIRECT THE R-4 TO PROVIDE APPOINTMENT TO THE PETITIONER ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND AS HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO OEN SMT. GOWRAMMA AS PER ORDER DTAED 22.03.2005 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION PASSED BY THE R-2 UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition being aggrieved by the endorsement dated 01.03.2018 issued by respondent No.4-Commissioner of Town Municipal Council, Hoskote, rejecting the application made by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds.
2. It is contended by the petitioner that her husband Sri T.Prakash entered the services of the town municipal council, Hoskote as Pourakarmika w.e.f. 17.01.1994. Subsequently, by order dated 30.07.1995 the petitioner’s husband was appointed under the relevant rules as Pourakarmika with pay scale attached to the said post. The petitioner’s husband passed away on 23.07.2006 before his services were regularized. After the death of the petitioner’s husband, the petitioner herein made an application to the respondent No.4 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. The respondent No.4-Commissioner of Town Municipal Council, Hoskote issued the impugned endorsement rejecting the application made by the petitioner on the ground that there is no provision for appointment on compassionate grounds, since the petitioner’s husband died even before his services were regularized.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to a circular dated 02.01.1997 issued by the respondent-State Government and further submits that as per the said circular, if a employee dies even before the services are regularized but has completed services of more than 10 years, the legal representative of the said employee shall be eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds.
4. Learned counsel relies upon a judgment of this Court in the case of R.Shivakumar /vs./ State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.57932/2017, which was disposed of on 20.06.2018. In that case, under similar circumstances, this Court while taking into consideration the circular dated 02.01.1997 quashed the endorsement issued and directed the respondents to consider the application made by the petitioner therein in the light of the circular dated 02.01.1997.
5. On the other hand, learned AGA submits that the case of the petitioner is different from the one in W.P.No.57932/2017 (supra). Learned AGA further submits that the appointment of the petitioner’s mother was not in accordance with law since the appointing authority as per the circular dated 10.02.1995 issued by the State Government, was the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned District, while the appointment of the petitioner’s husband was made by the President of the Town Municipal Council.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out to the relevant provisions i.e., Rule 2(b) of the Karnataka Municipalities (Recruitment of Officers and Servants) Rules 1971, which provides that in the case of posts, the pay or the maximum of the scale of pay which does not exceed Rs.1310/- per month, the Municipal Council is the appointing authority. Moreover, it is contended that under similar circumstances, in another case pertaining to one Sri Nagaraju, who was also a daily wage employee at Doddaballapur City Municipal Council, the services of the deceased employee was notionally regularized and his wife Smt. V.Lakshmamma was appointed on compassionate grounds, by order dated 07.11.2012.
7. In the light of the above, though the learned AGA seeks to sustain the endorsement issued by the respondent No.4-, in order to enable the respondents to take a decision, in view of the discussions made above, the endorsement dated 01.03.2018 at Annexure-P is quashed and direction is issued to the respondents to reconsider the application dated 14.08.2006 filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law. To enable the same, the petitioner is granted liberty to file representation enclosing a copy of the application and all supporting documents with respondent No.4, who shall take note of the same, keeping in view the observations contained in this order and thereafter take a fresh decision in accordance with law 8. The decision in any event shall be taken by the respondent No.4-Commissioner of Town Municipal Council, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than three months from the date of which the representation is submitted by the petitioner.
9. The other prayer by the petitioner regarding terminal benefits like gratuity, PF, etc., may be considered by the respondent-Authorities in accordance with law.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE DS