YESHWANTH S/O LATE NAYYANA v. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED
WP/103708/2024 · 2025-09-17
Suraj Govindaraj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59401 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59401 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12351 WP No. 103708 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 103708 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
YESHWANTH S/O. LATE AYYANNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, HOUSE NO. 238, 4TH WARD, KABERA PATE HOSPET, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. YOGESH M. DESAI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (GOVT OF KARNATAKA ENTERPRISE) RAICHUR TRIBUNAL POWER STATION, SHAKTINAGAR, RAICHUR DISTRICT AND THALU PIN-584170.
2.
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD., NO. 82, SHAKTI BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION. B) BE PLEASED QUASHED THE
ORDER BEARING NO. J12.¦1J/3106 DATED 14-10-2014 ORDER
Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12351 WP No. 103708 of 2024
PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AS PER ANNEXURE-F1. C) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND GRANT THE JOB ON COMPENSATORY GROUNDS. JOB IS FROM HIS DECEASED FATHER AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Be pleased to allow this writ petition.
b. Be pleased Quashed the order Bearing No. J12.¦1J/3106 dated 14-10-2014 order passed by the Respondent No. 2 as per Annexure-F1.
c. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to act in accordance with law and grant the job on compensatory grounds. job is from his deceased father.
d. Pass any such orders as the petitioners are entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the costs of the proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Petitioner's father had been employed as a Technician Grade at the Raichur Thermal Power Corporation
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12351 WP No. 103708 of 2024
Limited. He had expired on 03.12.2008. At that time the petitioner was 14 years. The mother of the petitioner submitted an application on 02.03.2009 giving the details of the legal heirs. Subsequently, there being a requirement to obtain a succession certificate on account of the details of the family members not having been entered in the service record by the deceased employee, the petitioner obtained a succession certificate on 19.06.2013 in P&SC No.7/2009, which was submitted for
consideration for appointment on a compassionate basis. The said Request came to be rejected on 14.10.2014 vide Annexure-F1. It is challenging the said rejection order dated 14.10.2014 the petitioner is before this Court.
3. A compassionate appointment is permitted to be made in terms of the applicable rules, to enable the family of a deceased government employee to tide over any financial difficulties so as to enable them to continue
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12351 WP No. 103708 of 2024
to live in the same manner as they did prior to the expiry of the earning member of the family. In the present matter, vide order dated 14.10.2014, the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected on the ground that the wife of the deceased employee was employed in a Government service. It is that order of 14.10.2014, which has been challenged in the present petition, which has been filed on 22.04.2024.
4. I am the considered opinion that as indicated supra, the compassionate appointment being to tide over the financial difficulties, after a period of 10 years of rejection, no ground would exist for the petitioner to seek for compassionate appointment. The petitioner has apparently no financial difficulties over the last 10 years and in that background after a long lapse of 10 years the said delay not being condonable, the present petition is not maintainable.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12351 WP No. 103708 of 2024
5. The petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
Sh Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46