- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49018-DB WA No. 813 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 813 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. VINDHYA.G.R. D/O. LATE RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KARNATAKA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, SUBRAMANYA RUBBER DIVISION, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. STATISH.K., ADVOCATE) AND: THE KARNATAKA FOREST CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, VANA VIKASA, 18TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 003. …RESPONDENT (BY MS. ANANYA RAI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MURUGESH.V.CHARATI., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE WP No-18641/2024 (S- RES) TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.12.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No- 18641/2024 (S-RES) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49018-DB WA No. 813 of 2025 REMANDING/ REMITTING THE MATTER TO THE RESPONDENT FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AND PASS ANY OTHER ORDER AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH & HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and award dated 04.12.2024 passed by the Learned Single Judge in WP.No.18641/2024. 2. So far as the matter has been remanded back to the appointing authority to see whether in the twin requirements of the petitioner i.e. Being resident along with deceased and being defendant in terms of Rule 4(1) of the rules and the explanation of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996. The petitioner is married daughter of Late.Ramachandra who was working as the Senior Gardener in the Karnataka Forest Corporation Limited. The father of the petitioner died in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49018-DB WA No. 813 of 2025 harness on 22.07.2022. The petitioner made an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground in terms of Rule 4 (1) of the Karnataka Civil Services appointment on compassionate ground rules. 3. The petitioner's application was considered and she was offered appointment and appointed on 27.01.2023. The petitioner has continued since then. However, vide order dated 10.07.2024 that is after working around one and a half years the appointment order dated 27.01.2023, giving appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground, came to be cancelled. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing the writ petition. The learned Single Judge had set aside the order 10.07.2024 however, has remanded the matter back to the Competent authority for fresh consideration on two requirements of the petitioner is being resilient along with the decision and being defendant in terms of Rule 4 to Rule 5. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant submits that in case of Class C and D employees, as provided under Rule 4(4), The income of the dependent or the family is not to be considered for giving compassionate appointment. He - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49018-DB WA No. 813 of 2025 further submit that once the authority offered the petitioner the appointment after considering all the facts, the cancellation of the order of appointment, is non est, and therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly set aside the order of cancellation of appointment, but has remanded the matter back as mentioned above. In the facts and circumstances of the case the remand was not warranted. 5. On the other hand Smt.Ananya Ray, learned counsel for the respondents submits that it is within the jurisdiction of the authority concerned to consider the factum of dependency etc., and the learned Single Judge has only remanded the matter on that aspect which need not to be interfered with. She has further submitted that it appears that the petitioner is well off. She has received provident fund in her account and other retirement dues of DCRG of the late father and therefore there was no financial distress in the family to offer her appointment under compassionate ground. 6. We have considered the submissions, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was offered the appointment and she had worked for more than one and a half years with the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49018-DB WA No. 813 of 2025 respondent, when the impugned order dated 10.07.2024 came to be passed, cancelling the appointment of the petitioner. We are of the view that the authority must have looked into the all aspects before offering the Appointment and after the petitioner having worked for more than one and half years, the order of cancelling the appointment does not appear to be correct. We therefore do not find that the matter requires any reconsideration on behalf of the respondent-authorities. Therefore, we allow the petition and the Order of remand passed by the learned Single Judge for reconsideration by the appellate authority is set aside. The writ appeal stands allowed. 7. All pending applications also stand disposed off. (D K SINGH) JUDGE (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 Digitally signed by DINESH KUMAR SINGH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA