- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2960 WP No. 32688 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 32688 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. PAVAN S V AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O R VIJAY KUMAR 2. SMT. PADMA R AGED ABOUT 46 YEA RS W/O R VIJAY KUMAR BOTH THE PETITIONER ARE R/AT NO.85A, NH4, KANTHARAJU CIRCLE ANANTHAPURA KOTHAMANGALA POST MULABAGAL TALUK KOLAR- 563131. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIKAS NAGAIAH C., ADV. SRI. C V SRINIVASA, ADV.) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ROOM NO.334, 3RD FLOOR VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE -560 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2960 WP No. 32688 of 2024 COMMUNICATIONS AND BUILDINGS SOUTH ZONE NRUPATHUNGA ROAD AMBEDIKAR VEEDHI SAMPANGI RAMANAGARA BANGALORE- 560 001. 3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH KOLAR KOLAR DISTRICT KARNATAKA -563101. 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH SRINIVASPURA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT KARNATAKA- 563101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2 R3 & R4 ARE SERVED) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 05.01.2016, 23.01.2016, 15.07.2016, 21.11.2016, 21.05.2022, 27.11.2023 PRODUCED AS (ANNEXURE-E, F, G, L, Q, Y) GIVEN BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE RESPONDENTS FOR THE GRANT OF EMPLOYMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS AND TO DISPOSE THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY GRANTING APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT IN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FORTHWITH. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2960 WP No. 32688 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel Sri.Vikas Nagaiah C., for Sri.C.V.Srinivasa, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Naveen Chandrashekhar for respondent Nos.1 and 2. There is no representation for respondent Nos.3 and 4, though court notice is served on them. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that their father Late R.Vijay Kumar was working as Second Division Assistant in the office of 4th respondent and he died while is service on 30.11.2015. It is stated that the first petitioner submitted a representation on 05.01.2016 (Annexure-E) seeking appointment on compassionate ground. Thereafter, petitioners have made several representations at Annexure-F dated 23.01.2016, Annexure-G dated 15.07.2016; Annexure-Q dated 21.05.2022. But it is submitted that the respondents have not taken any action on those representations. Learned counsel would submit that the respondents have an - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2960 WP No. 32688 of 2024 obligation to consider the representations filed seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. As the respondents have failed to consider the representations, the petitioners would be entitled for a writ of mandamus. 3. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are required to consider the representations and pass appropriate orders to whom the petitioners have submitted application/ representations. 4. According to the petitioners, at the time of death, their father was working in the 4th respondent office. Petitioners had submitted applications seeking appointment on compassionate grounds to respondent Nos.3 and 4. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 have not taken any action as required under Karnataka Civil Services (Compassionate Appointment) Rules, 1996 (for short “1996 Rules”). The respondents have statutory obligation to consider the applications/representations of the petitioners for compassionate appointment. As - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2960 WP No. 32688 of 2024 respondent Nos.3 and 4 have failed to consider the representations/applications of the petitioners for compassionate appointment, they would be entitled for a writ of mandamus. 5. Hence the following order: (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directed to consider the representations/applications of the petitioners dated 05.01.2016, 23.01.2016 and 15.07.2016 vide Annexures-E, F and G, respectively and Annexure-Q dated 12.03.2018 and pass appropriate order, in accordance with 1996 Rules, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63