Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 65760 (KAR)

ASHOK S/O. SIDDAPPA MATAPPANAVAR v. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION

WP/100094/2014 · 2025-08-28

S R Krishna Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10895 WP No. 100094 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 100094 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: ASHOK S/O. SIDDAPPA MATAPPANAVAR AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. KALASANNAVAR ONI, GAMANAGATTI, POST: NAVALUR, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND AND MOTHER FAKKIRAVVA SIDDAPPA MATAPPANAVAR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KALASANNAVAR ONI, GAMANAGATTI, POST: NAVALUR, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.P.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD, BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, VIDYUTNAGAR, KARWAR ROAD, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, VIDYUTNAGAR, KARWAR ROAD, DATED 21.08.2013 IN NO.605/BRU.KA.VI/KANIA/LEA/SALEA/ SISA/2013-14/2710-14, VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND DECLARE THAT Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.09.01 15:21:59 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10895 WP No. 100094 of 2014 REGULATION 5 OF THE KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD RECRUITMENT (APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS) REGULATION 1997 IS ARBITRARY, DISCRIMINATORY AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ONE AND STRIKE DOWN THE SAME AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs. (a) quash the impugned order passed by the Executive Engineer, Major Works Division, Vidyutnagar, Karwar Road, dated 21.08.2013 in No.605 / Bru.Ka.Vi / KaNiA / LeA / SaLeA / SiSa / 2013-14 / 2710-14, vide Annexure-C in the interest of justice and equity. (b) declare that Regulation 5 of the Karnataka Electricity Board Recruitment (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Regulation 1997 is arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional one and strike down the same. (c) Pass such order or orders which this Hon’ble court deems fit and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10895 WP No. 100094 of 2014 2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that, the petitioner’s father late Sri Siddappa Matappanavar was working as a Helper in the Store Division of KPTCL and expired during harness on 07.05.2012. In terms of the Rule 5 of the Karnataka Electricity Board Recruitment (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Regulation, 1997, which was amended with effect from 01.04.2011, the petitioner was bound to file an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground within a period of one year after attaining the age of majority and the petitioner ought to have attain the age of majority within a period of one year from the date of demise of his father. 4. Under these circumstances, the application dated 07.05.2012 filed by the petitioner on 30.04.2013, when he was aged about 16 years was rejected by the respondent – KPTCL on the ground that the same was not maintainable and not in conformity with the aforesaid Rules and Regulations governing compassionate appointment. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10895 WP No. 100094 of 2014 5. After hearing learned counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the impugned endorsement/communication dated 21.08.2013, rejecting the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, I am of the view that the impugned endorsement is in conformity with the extant regulations and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court in the present petition, which is accordingly disposed of without interfering with the impugned endorsement. 6. However, the challenge to the aforesaid regulations is not dealt with for the purpose of the present order. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE EM Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6