"A) Issue writ of mandamus directing the
respondents to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 11.1.2021 vide Annexure E for the
appointment on compassionate grounds any suitable
post in group D,
B) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the endorsement
vide bearing No. Hachiga/Masa/Aa.Aa Ne/2021 dated
3.8.2021 vide Annexure - F issued by the respondent
No.1 ,
C) To pass any such other relief/s as this Honourable
Court deems fit"
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2237
HC-KAR
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioner's brother, who was working in the
respondent company had died in harness on 18.03.2005.
Subsequently, petitioner had filed an application seeking
compassionate appointment in the respondent company.
The said application was rejected on 16.04.2015. It
appears that thereafter petitioner had made application to
then Hon'ble Chief Minister on 15.07.2021 and also to the
Managing Director of the company on 11.01.2021 to
reconsider her case for appointment on compassionate
ground. It is under these circumstances, petitioner's case
was reconsidered by the respondent company for
appointment on compassionate ground and was rejected
vide impugned communication dated 03.08.2021 at
Annexure-F. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before
this Court.
4. Petitioner's brother Bhimappa, who was an
employee of respondent company had died in harness on
18.03.2005. Undisputedly, he was married on the date of
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2237
HC-KAR
his death. The guidelines of respondent company, which
provide for appointment on companionate ground is in
force from 14.03.2012. Clause 4 (b) (i) (g) of the said
guidelines clearly states that brother or sister of deceased
employee would be entitled for compassionate
appointment, if the employee was bachelor at the time of
his death. In the case on hand, as stated earlier, deceased
Bhimappa was married. In view of aforesaid fact,
petitioner, who is the sister of deceased Bhimappa, is not
eligible to claim appointment on compassionate ground.
5. In addition to the same, material on record would
go to show that application seeking appointment on
compassionate ground has been filed in the present case
belatedly after a period of more than 10 years from the
date of death. The said application was considered and
rejected on 16.04.2015. The said order of rejection dated
16.04.2015 is not questioned by the petitioner. On the
other hand, the petitioner had filed an application to
reconsider her case for appointment and the same was
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2237
HC-KAR
rejected vide impugned communication dated 03.08.2021
vide Annexure-F.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State
of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari and Ors reported
in 2023 SCC Online SC 219, at paragraph No.35 has
observed as under:
"Considering the second question referred to
above, in the first instance, regarding whether
applications for compassionate appointment
could be considered after a delay of several
years, we are of the view that, in a case where,
for reasons of prolonged delay, either on the
part of the applicant in claiming compassionate
appointment or the authorities in deciding such
claim, the sense of immediacy is diluted and
lost. Further, the financial circumstances of the
family of the deceased, may have changed, for
the better, since the time of the death of the
government employee. In such circumstances,
Courts or other relevant authorities are to be
guided by the fact that for such prolonged
period of delay, the family of the deceased was
able to sustain themselves, most probably by
availing gainful employment from some other
source. Granting compassionate appointment in
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2237
HC-KAR
such a case, as noted by this Court in Hakim
Singh would amount to treating a claim for
compassionate appointment as though it were a
matter of inheritance based on a line of
succession which is contrary to the Constitution.
Since compassionate appointment is not a
vested right and the same is relative to the
financial condition and hardship faced by the
dependents of the deceased government
employee as a consequence of his death, a
claim for compassionate appointment may not
be entertained after lapse of a considerable
period of time since the death of the
government employee."
7. In view of the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that
the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly,
dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
NJ
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44
