Karnataka High Court
Smt. Latha H.R vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB
WP No. 20216 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT PETITION NO. 20216 OF 2024 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT. LATHA H.R.,
W/O BORAIAH K N
D/O LATE RANGASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT NO.98, SHRUGARASAGAR VILLAGE,
HALEVOOR ROAD, NEAR KEMPEGOWDA SCHOOL,
KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR - 572123
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SATISH K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by NANDINI D DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Location: High REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
Court of
Karnataka VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
COMMUINICATIONS AND BUILDING (SOUTH)
K R CIRCLE, BANGALORE 560001
3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
KUNIGAL SUB DIVISION,
KUNIGAL, TUMKUR 572130
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS.)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB
WP No. 20216 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.07.2024 PASSED BY
THE HON'BLE KSAT TRIBUNAL BANGALORE PASSED IN A.No-
4897/2023 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE
SAID A.No-4897/2023 AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE-B) ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
1. This writ petition is filed assailing the order dated 11th July, 2024 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in Application No.4897 of 2023 (for short brevity hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal").
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the daughter of one Rangaswamy, who passed away on 27th February, 2019, while -3- NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB WP No. 20216 of 2024 working as Gangman in the office of the Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Sub-Division, Kunigal. It is submitted that though an application was made for compassionate appointment in respect of the petitioner, it came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner is a married daughter and that Annexure-A9, which is an amendment made to the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) (Amendment) Rules, 1996 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as "Rules"), had only prospective effect. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the provisions of unamended Rules that compassionate appointment would not be offered to a married daughter, had held to be unconstitutional by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of SMT. BHUVANESHWARI V. PURANIK v STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS reported in ILR 2021 KAR 5256. It is submitted that the said decision had been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court and the proposition has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well. It is therefore, contended that the rejection of the application made by the petitioner was per-se illegal and the Tribunal erred in dismissing the application before it. Reliance -4- NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB WP No. 20216 of 2024 is also placed on the decisions of this Court in similar matters as are available at Annexure-A13 to A19.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand, contends that though the Court had found that the provisions contained in the unamended Rules was unconstitutional, the State had, on 09th April, 2021, effected an amendment to the Rules, which took away the offending provision. However, the case of the respondent before the Tribunal was that the said amendment dated 09th April, 2021 had only prospective effect and therefore, it could not be applied to cases where the death of the Government Servant took place before 09th April, 2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that this specific issue had been considered by this Court in a common judgment in Writ Petition No.3340 of 2020 and 1002 of 2021 filed by the State where the question with regard to the retrospective effect of the amendment was considered and it was found that since the amendment is effected by substitution, it would be retrospective, i.e. with effect from the date of original Rules itself.
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB WP No. 20216 of 2024
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate, contends that the question with regard to eligibility of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with provisions of Rules, will now have to be specifically considered.
6. Having considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the opinion that the finding of the Tribunal that the amendment had only prospective effect and therefore the application cannot be considered, cannot be accepted. The petitioner's application has been rejected only on the ground that she is a married daughter of the deceased government servant. It is not disputed that the provisions of the unamended Rules to the effect only an unmarried daughter could make an application stood struck down as unconstitutional and the said judgment has become final. Thereafter, the Rules have also been amended substituting the words "unmarried daughter" with the word "daughter".
7. In the above view of the matter and in view of the fact of amendment made to the Rules by substitution, we are of the opinion that the rejection of the application for appointment -6- NC: 2024:KHC:30251-DB WP No. 20216 of 2024 made by the petitioner on the sole ground that she is a married daughter cannot be accepted.
8. In the result, writ petition is allowed. Order dated 11th July, 2024 passed in Application No.4897 of 2023 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, shall stand set aside. The endorsement dated 27th June, 2022 impugned before the Tribunal shall also stand set aside. The competent Authority- Respondent shall consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with Rules in force and without raising the objection that she is a married daughter. All other issues are left open to be decided by the respondent in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE LNN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40