[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sangeeta And Anr vs Kalyan Karnataka Road Transport ... on 24 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2637
WP No. 200994 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 200994 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SANGEETA W/O ARJUN KATE,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O C/O N.B. PATIL,
NEAR MARUTI GUDI GACHCHINKATTI COLONY,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
2. SMT. BHAGYASHREE
W/O LATE CHIDANAND PUJARI,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O C/O N.B. PATIL,
NEAR MARUTI GUDI GACHCHINKATTI COLONY,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
Digitally signed by
SWETA KULKARNI ...PETITIONERS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. SHRAVAN KUMAR MATH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KALYAN KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KALABURAGI-585101.
2. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KALYAN KARNATAKA
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
VIJAYAPURA DIVISION,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2637
WP No. 200994 of 2024
HC-KAR
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A)
ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION BY ISSUING WRIT OR ORDER
DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING
THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING
NO.¸ÀA:PÀPg
À ¸
À Á/««/¹§âA¢/£ÉêÀÄPÀ/1262//2023-2024 DATED 20-07-2023
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 WHICH IS AT
ANNEXURE-F. B) ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION BU ISSUING
WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO GIVE
APPOINTMENT TO PETITIONER NO.2 ON COMPASSIONATE
GROUND. C) TO GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF TO WHICH THE
PETITIONER COMPANY IS FOUND ENTITLED IN THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India is filed with a prayer to issue writ of
certiorari quashing the endorsement at Annexure-F dated
20.07.2023 issued by respondent no.2 and to appoint the
petitioner no.2 to a suitable post on compassionate ground.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2637
HC-KAR
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Husband of the first petitioner no.1 and father of
the petitioner no.2, namely late Sri Arjun, who was working as
a conductor in respondent no.1 Corporation, had died in
harness on 17.01.2021. Petitioner no.2, who is the widowed
daughter of deceased Arjun had filed an application on
04.05.2021 seeking appointment to a suitable post on
compassionate ground. The respondent no.2, who is the
competent authority, vide the impugned endorsement at
Annexure-F dated 20.07.2023, has rejected the application of
the petitioner no.2 seeking appointment on compassionate
grounds, for the reason that the annual income of the family
was Rs.8,89,812/- and therefore, in view of the circular dated
04.12.2018, petitioner no.2 was not eligible for appointment on
compassionate ground. Aggrieved by the said endorsement,
petitioner is before this Court.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2637
HC-KAR
4. The deceased Arjun, who is the husband of
petitioner no.1 and father of petitioner no.2, had died in
harness on 17.01.2021. Application has been filed by the
petitioner no.2, who is the widowed daughter of the deceased,
on 04.05.2021 seeking appointment on compassionate ground.
Therefore, the application is filed well within time. Application
has been rejected by the competent authority placing reliance
on the circular issued by respondent no.1 on 04.12.2018 which
provides that if the family has an average annual income
exceeding Rs.6,27,150/-, then the members of the family of
the deceased are not eligible for compassionate appointment.
However, no such restriction is found in the subsequent
amended circular of the first respondent dated 31.01.2022
which was brought into force to provide opportunity to married
or widowed daughter of the deceased and also to provide
speedy relief to the dependents of the employees, who had
died during COVID-19 pandemic. This presupposes that the
circular dated 31.01.2022 has a retrospective effect. Under the
circumstances, second respondent was not justified in issuing
the endorsement placing reliance on the earlier circular dated
04.02.2018, which was amended and replaced by a subsequent
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2637
HC-KAR
circular dated 31.01.2022, which is referred to at Sl.No.6 in the
impugned endorsement.
5. Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
i) Writ petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned endorsement at Annexure-F
dated 20.07.2023 issued by second respondent
is quashed and the matter is remitted to
second respondent to consider the application
of petitioner no.2 afresh in the light of the
aforesaid circular dated 31.01.2022 issued by
respondent no.1.
iii) The said exercise shall be done by second
respondent as expeditiously as possible, but
not later than the period of four months from
the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
NMS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50
ct:pk
