- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO. 100451 OF 2023 (S-RES) BETWEEN SRI. ANAND S/O. APPASAHEB KOLI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: UNEMPLOYED, R/O.H.NO.210/2A, NEAR LAXMI TEMPLE ROAD, BEHIND OF IDBI BANK, CHIKKODI, CHAWAL GOKAK, TALUK. GOKAK, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591307. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. H. M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY IT’S UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE SECRETARY, KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. 3. THE DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, EXECUTIVE AND MAINTENANCE CIRCLE, HUBBALLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., BELAGAVI-590001. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), EXECUTIVE AND MAINTENANCE DIVISION, HUBBALLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., GHATAPRABHA, DIST. BELAGAVI-591311. 7. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), EXECUTIVE AND MAINTENANCE SUB-DIVISION, HUBBALLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-591307. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. B. S. KAMATE, ADV. FOR R2 TO R7) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.06.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION IN W.P.NO.104562/2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND ALLOWS WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT HEREIN, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 18.08.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 CAV JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) This intra-Court appeal is filed challenging the order dated 16.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.104562/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge wherein the writ petition filed by the appellant came to be rejected. 2. Heard. 3. Sri.H.M.Dharigond, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the father of the appellant was working as a Lineman with the third respondent-Corporation and after his death, his second wife was provided employment on compassionate ground. It is submitted that Smt.Gunarani- the second wife of deceased Appasab (employee) died while in service leaving behind one daughter and two sons including the appellant and two sons and two daughters of Sushila who was the first wife of the employee. It is further submitted that brother of the appellant filed an application seeking for appointment on compassionate ground which came to be rejected. It is also submitted that there were correspondences between the respondent-Corporation and the State - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 Government as to providing second compassionate appointment and the Government on 12.05.2011 clarified that the second compassionate appointment is permissible and therefore the third respondent decided to provide compassionate appointment to the employees who were also appointed on compassionate ground and who died before 12.05.2011. It is contended that the appellant filed an application along with documents seeking for appointment on compassionate grounds on 11.03.2019 and contrary to the decision of the Corporation and the Government order, the application of the appellant came to be rejected on 29.08.2019 which was challenged before the learned Single Judge. However, the same was not properly appreciated. It is further contended that there is no delay in filing an application as the third respondent – Corporation has taken the decision to provide compassionate appointment only on 28.01.2019 and the application of the appellant was filed on 11.03.2019. Hence, he seeks to issue direction to the respondent-Corporation to reconsider the case of the appellant. 4. Per contra, Sri.B.S.Kamate, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 7 and learned AGA - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 appearing for respondent No.1-State support the order of the learned Single Judge and submit that the application of the appellant was rightly rejected by the authority on the ground of delay as it was filed after 14 years 11 months 10 days. Hence, they seek to dismiss the appeal. 5. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondents, meticulously perused the material available on record and we have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 6. The material available on record indicates that the Appellant’s father Appasab Narsappa Koli was working as a Lineman with the third respondent-Corporation. He died while in service leaving behind the second wife and children of the first wife and children of the second wife. The second wife of employee filed an application seeking for appointment on compassionate ground which was allowed and she was provided employment. She worked as Junior Assistant at the respondent-Corporation. The records further indicate that the mother of the appellant Smt.Gunarani died on 23.04.2004 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 while on service. The appellant’s brother Shankar Appasab Koli filed an application seeking for appointment on compassionate grounds which came to be rejected on 22.12.2006. Admittedly, the rejection of the application of the appellant’s brother has attained finality. The appellant filed an application seeking for appointment on compassionate ground on 22.05.2017. The records indicate that the appellant’s date of birth is 06.06.1992 and he attained the majority in the year 2010. The mother of the appellant died on 23.04.2004. Considering the date of attaining majority by the appellant and date of death of the mother of the appellant, the application filed by the appellant is beyond the period of time provided under the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees’ Recruitment (Appointment On Compassionate Grounds) Regulations, 1997 (for short, ‘1997 Regulations’). The contention that the Government vide its order dated 12.05.2011 permitted the compassionate appointment of the dependent of the deceased employee who was also appointed on compassionate ground and pursuant to the said Government order, the respondent-Corporation adopted the said Government order in the year 2019, hence, the application filed by the appellant is within the period of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 limitation has no merit. The order dated 28.01.2019 clearly indicates that the application filed by the dependent of the deceased employee who was also appointed on compassionate ground should be valid and has to be filed within the prescribed period of time. It is a well settled law that for all government vacancies equal opportunity should be provided to all the aspirants as is mandated under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution. However, appointment on compassionate ground offered to the dependant of a deceased employee is an exception to the said norms. Such being the case, the compassionate appointment is a concession and not a vested right and the criteria laid down in the rules must be satisfied by all the aspirants. This view of ours gain support from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.C.Santhosh v State of Karnataka and Others1. 7. In the instant case, the 1997 Regulations of the corporation referred supra clearly indicate that the application for compassionate appointment should be filed within a period of one year after attaining the majority by the dependent. 1 (2020) 7 SCC 617 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10584-DB WA No. 100451 of 2023 However, the appellant attained the age of majority in the year 2010 and application for seeking appointment on compassionate ground is filed only in the year 2017, which is clearly in violation of the prescribed rules. Learned Single Judge taking note of the law of the point has rightly recorded the finding that there is no error in the endorsement issued by the respondent-Corporation rejecting the application of the appellant for compassionate appointment. We do not find any error or perversity in the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge calling for interference in this intra-Court appeal. The appeal is devoid of merits, accordingly, the same is rejected. No order as to costs. Sd/ (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE RH CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1