Karnataka High Court
Smt Jyothi S vs The Division Controller on 4 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:482
WP No. 23047 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 23047 OF 2022 (S-KSRTC)
BETWEEN:
SMT JYOTHI S
W/O LATE ANAND K C
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT MEGALAPURA VILLAGE
HADLI POST
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571430.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA S., ADV.)
AND:
1. THE DIVISION CONTROLLER
K.S.R.T.C. DIVISION
Digitally signed by MANDYA
MAHALAKSHMI B M MANDYA DISTRICT-571430.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. SRI CHIKERAPPA @ CHIKKARAPPA
S/O LATE ERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
3. SRI PRASANNA C
S/O CHIKERAPPA @ CHIKKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
4. SMT. ASHA C
W/O LATE MAHESH P
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE
R/AT MEGHALAPURA VILLAGE
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:482
WP No. 23047 of 2022
KASABA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-572430.
5. SMT. SAVITHA
W/O PRABHU
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT PANDITHAHALLI VILLAGE
B.G. PURA HOBLI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-572430.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADV. FOR R1
SRI NATARAJ BABA K., ADV. FOR R2-5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 26.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS APPLICATION FOR
APPOINTMENT ON THE COMPASSIONATE GROUND.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking to quash
the impugned endorsement bearing
No.PÀgÁ¸Á/ªÀÄAqÀå.«/£ÉêÀÄPÀ/1235/2022-23 dated 26.09.2022
issued by the respondent-Authority vide Annexure-D and
to consider the petitioner's application for appointment on
compassionate ground.
2. Heard Sri. Nagaraja .S, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Hareesh Bhandary .T,
NC: 2024:KHC:482
learned counsel for respondent No.1-Corporation and Sri.
Nataraj Baba .K, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to
5.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the endorsement issued by the respondent-Authority
at Annexure-D stating that a Civil Suit is pending before
the Civil Court instituted by father-in-law of the petitioner
and as such, the Authority cannot give death benefit or job
on compassionate ground is not justifiable. The main
grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the
representation given by the petitioner at Annexure-C
dated 01.08.2022, the respondent-Authority has passed
endorsement without considering the representation.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-
Corporation submits that the petitioner and the family
members of the petitioner's husband have entered into an
amicable settlement in the original suit in
O.S.No.316/2021 and if necessary materials are placed
before the Authority by way of a representation, the same
NC: 2024:KHC:482
would be considered and appropriate order would be
passed within stipulated time.
5. Submission of the learned counsel for
respondent No.1-Corporation is placed on record.
6. The grievance of the petitioner would be meted,
if necessary direction is issued to respondent No.1-
Corporation to consider the representation of the
petitioner at Annexure-C along with necessary documents
that would be furnished separately by way of separate
representation. The impugned endorsement stating death
benefit or job on compassionate ground will be given on
the outcome of the judgment in O.S.No.316/2021 is
unsustainable and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, this
Court proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
1) Writ petition is allowed in part.
2) Impugned endorsement bearing
No.PÀgÁ¸Á/ªÀÄAqÀå.«/£ÉêÀÄPÀ/1235/2022-23
NC: 2024:KHC:482
dated 26.09.2022 issued by respondent-
Authority is hereby set aside.
3) Petitioner is at liberty to file fresh
representation along with necessary
documents.
4) The respondent-Authority to consider the
representation of the petitioner at
Annexure-C and the documents that
would be furnished by the petitioner along
with additional representation and the
same shall be considered within a period
of eight weeks from the date of filing the
additional representation and pass
necessary orders in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NC
CT:bms
