- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14860 OF 2025 (S-DIS) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 14871 OF 2025 (S-RES) WRIT PETITION NO. 14872 OF 2025 (S-RES) IN WP No. 14860/2025 BETWEEN: CHANNAMMA MATHAPATI W/O KUMAR SWAMY KALMATH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT 3/73 KOPPAL DISTRICT KARNATAKA 583226. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S SUDHARSAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU KARNATAKA 560001. 2. KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR KMF BUILDING CUNNINGHAM ROAD KAVERAPPA LAYOUT VASANTH NAGAR BENGALURU KARNATAKA 560052. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 3. KITHUR RANI CHANAMMA RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SHIRAHATTI RURAL GADAG KARNATAKA- 582120 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER., AGA FOR R1: SRI SHISHIRA AMARANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDS OF THE MEETING DATED: 22.04.2025 BEARING NO. 16461/KREIS/ADMN/OTH/307/2024 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-E AND ETC. IN WP NO. 14871/2025 BETWEEN: GEETHA G W/O RAMA MURGHY R AGED ABOAUT 36 YEARS R/AT REDDI HALLI, K G F GHATTAKAMADENAHALLI KOLAR KARNATKAA 563121 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S SUDHARSAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PRIMARY AND SECRONDARY EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01. 2. KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR KMF BUILDING CUNNINGHAM ROAD KAVERAPPA LAYOUT VASANTH NAGAR BENGALURU - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 KARNATAKA 560052 3. MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL DISTRICT RAICHUR KARNATAKA 561222 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER., ADVOCATE FOR R1: SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDS OF THE MEETING DATED: 22.04.2025 BEARING NO. 164161 KREIS/ADMN/OTH/307/2024 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE F AND ETC. IN WP NO. 14872/2025 BETWEEN: MAMATA DODAMANI D/O DURGAPPA DODAMANI AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NEAR SSM HIGH SCHOOL INDIRANAGAR MUDDEBIHAL TALUK BIJAPUR DISTIRCT KARNATAKA 58611 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S SUDHARSAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-56001. 2. KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR KMF BUILDING CUNNINGHAM ROAD - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 KAVERAPPA LAYOUT VASANTH NAGAR BENGALURU KARNATAKA 560052 3. MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MASKI 584124 DISTRICT RAICHUR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER, AGA FOR R1: SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDS OF THE MEETING DATED 22.04.2025 BEARING NO. 164161 KREIS/ADMN/OTH/307/2024 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE F AT PAGE NO 37 TO 39 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO2 AND ETC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 22.04.2025 issued by respondent No.2, whereby the petitioners have been relieved from service. 2. The respondents issued notification on 27.04.2011, calling applications for appointment to the posts of teaching and non-teaching staff for residential - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 institutions, i.e., Murarji Desai Residential School and Kittur Rani Chennamma Residential School. The said Institutions have been established under the Karnataka Residential Education Institutions Society. Pursuant to the notification, the petitioners had applied to the posts reserved for ex-serviceman dependents. Thereafter, the petitioner in W.P.No. 14860/2025, by order dated 06.06.2012 was appointed as a Warden at Murarji Desai Residential School, Shirahatti, the petitioner in W.P.No. 14871/2025, by order dated 04.06.2012 was appointed as a Staff Nurse at Murarji Desai Residential School, K.G.F. and the petitioner in W.P.No. 14872/2025, by order dated 03.06.2012 was appointed as a Hindi Teacher at Murarji Desai Residential School, Maski in the posts reserved for ex-serviceman dependents. The petitioners have been appointed on probation for a period of two years. The same has been extended from time to time. Under the Rules, all the teaching and non-teaching staff have to clear - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 the examinations conducted by the Society for declaration of probation. 3. The first and the second petitioners have completed their examinations conducted by the Society in the year 2015 and the petitioner No.3 completed in 2012. All the three petitioners have passed in the examination. After they have passed the examinations, before declaring the probationary period, the documents have been called for verification on 10.04.2015. On such verification, it is found that the petitioners are not dependents of ex- serviceman as defined under Rule 9(1) of the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules. Therefore, notice has been issued to the first petitioner in the year 2019 and in respect of second and third petitioners in the year 2018. Pursuant to the said notices, the petitioners have submitted their replies. The same has been placed before the Society. After considering the same, it has passed a resolution on 22.04.2025 taking a decision to relieve the petitioners from the service. On that basis, the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 impugned endorsement has been sent to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners raised the following contentions: (i) Firstly, the petitioners by bonafide mistake, in the application have mentioned that they are claiming under the quota of ex-serviceman dependents. (ii) Secondly, they have not concealed any documents from the respondents. After considering the documents submitted by the petitioners, the appointment orders have been issued in the year 2012. Till 2015, no action has been taken. For the first time, in the years 2018 and 2019, notices have been issued to the petitioners. The petitioners have submitted detailed reply. Without considering the said reply, after a lapse of six years, the impugned order has been passed. The same is passed without the authority of law. In support of his - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 contention, he relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MD.ZAMIL AHMED vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS reported in (2016) 12 SCC 342 and contended that the petitioners have neither concealed any facts nor filed any false or incorrect documents at the time of the appointment. Under the circumstances, the termination of the services of the petitioners is not justified. (iii) Thirdly, the petitioners have worked for more than 13 years and their appointment is after following all procedures of law. They have not concealed any documents at the time of the appointment. After a lapse of 13 years, the respondents have issued the impugned order, which is not justified. In support of his contentions, he relied on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of UDAY PRATAP SINGH vs. DISTRICT BASIC EDUCATION OFFICER, BASTI AND OTHERS reported in 2023 SCC Online All 3796. Hence, sought to allow the writ petition. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have raised the following contentions: (i) Firstly, the petitioners filed applications claiming the post which is reserved for ex-serviceman dependent. The petitioners were appointed through the Centralized Admission Cell. After the petitioners have been selected in the post reserved for ex-serviceman dependents, the records have been forwarded to the Society. In turn, the Society issued the appointment orders, but with certain conditions and they were appointed on probation for a period of two years which may be extended. In the year 2015, the examination was conducted for confirmation of the probationary period. The petitioners have passed in the examination and on verification of the documents, it was found that the petitioners were not dependents of ex- serviceman. Therefore, the documents have been sent to the Government. After receiving information from the Government, they have issued notices to the petitioners in - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 the years 2018 and 2019. After obtaining the reply, the matter has been sent to the Government for clarification. In 2021, information has been received to take action of discharging of the services of the petitioners. Thereafter, the matter has been placed before the Society. The Society passed a resolution to relieve the petitioners from service. On that basis, the impugned communication has been issued. (ii) Secondly, condition No.3 of the appointment order is very clear that if the candidates suppress any material facts, their appointment will be cancelled without giving any notice. In these cases, notices have been served and the petitioners have not submitted necessary documents to show that they are the dependents of ex- serviceman. Therefore, they were relieved from service. (iii) Thirdly, the petitioners were on probation and their services were not yet confirmed. Their appointment itself is illegal. After following the principles of natural - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 justice, the impugned order has been passed. Hence, sought to dismiss the appeal. 6. The learned AGA supported the impugned order. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers. 8. The respondent issued a notification calling applications for appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff in respect of residential educational institutions. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners submitted their applications for the posts of Warden, Staff Nurse and Hindi Teacher. All the three petitioners were applied under the quota reserved for ex-serviceman dependents. Rule 9 of the Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977 deals with reservation to dependents of ex- serviceman. The relevant portion is extracted below: “9. Provision for Ex-serviceman [Person with bench mark disability] and [members of the family of a project displaced persons] [Women] and [Kannada Medium Students] - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the rules of recruitment specially made in respect of any service or post, if in such rules or recruitment direct recruitment is prescribed as one of the methods of recruitment, [ten percentage of the vacancies set apart for that method in each of the categories of General Merit, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and in each of the Categories among Other Backward Classes shall be reserved for, and] shall be filled by direct recruitment from among ex- servicemen and members of the families of persons who, while serving in the Armed Forces of the Union, were either killed or permanently disabled. Explanation:-For the purpose of this sub-rule members of the family means the wife or husband, as the case may be, and children and step children wholly dependent on the person who served in the Armed Forces of the Union.” 9. The ex-serviceman dependents means a member of the family, who is wholly dependent on the person who has served in the Armed Forces of the Union, either killed or presently permanently disabled. 10. In the appointment order, there is specific condition No.3, which is extracted below: - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 “3. и ė’†ќĄỳΎ жĕ’†ẁẀ÷ ећŁyðў жΞĨўΡń ĝỳẀ÷ĕ’† Ġ’―†јĕ’―†Ẃхಳù угя— њгѕΡń ė’†ќĄỳΎўї—Ļ ĝỳẀ÷ĕ’† ќ—ї―ʼnшė’Β†яĕ’ џѕ—ĹјΉẃĠỳх—Ẁ÷ѕ—.” Condition No.3 states that, if the candidates obtain the appointment and in the appointment, if there is any defect, their appointments will be cancelled without any prior notice. 11. It is not in dispute that the petitioners had applied to the posts reserved for ex-serviceman dependents. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners case is not covered under Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules. In this case, the petitioners have secured access to the benefit of reservation in spite of the fact that they do not belong to the class for whom reservation is intended. The reservation is for dependents of ex-serviceman who was killed or permanently disabled while serving in the Armed Forces of the Union. The Apex Court in the case of CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs. JAGDISH - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 BALARAM BAHIRA AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 8 SCC 670, in the case of obtaining fake caste certificate held that it is not required to be established for cancellation of admission/appointment/withdrawal of benefits. The relevant paragraphs are extracted below: “3. The batch of cases with which the court is confronted involves individuals who sought the benefit of public employment on the basis of a claim to belong to a beneficiary group which has, upon investigation, been found to be invalid. Despite the invalidation of the claim to belong to a Scheduled Caste or, as the case may be, a Scheduled Tribe or backward community, the intervention of the court is invoked in the exercise of the power of judicial review. The basis for the invocation of jurisdiction lies in an assertion that equities arise upon a lapse of time and these equities are capable of being protected either by the High Court (in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226) or by this Court (when it discharges the constitutional function of doing complete justice under Article 142). The present batch of cases then raises the fundamental issue as to whether such equities are sustainable at law and, if so, the limits that define the jurisdiction of the - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 court to protect individuals who have secured access to the benefit of reservation in spite of the fact that they do not belong to the caste, tribe or class for whom reservation is intended. 4. A large body of precedent has evolved both in the High Courts as well as in this Court in seeking to find answers to pleas raised by individuals that they are entitled to protection by a constitutional court, even after the invalidation of their caste or tribe claims. The decided cases reflect a profound awareness on the part of courts of the human element involved. Assessment of human consequences case by case has resulted in a conflicting line of approach, in the effort of the court to balance the letter of law with a sense of compassion. Since this Bench of three Judges is called upon to seek a median, through the body of judicial precedent, it is, at the outset, necessary to set out the fundamental values and vision which the court must pursue. Those values as well as the vision is charted out to the court by the Constitution and it is the Constitution which the court expounds. The constitutional policy of creating reservations subserves a high constitutional value of providing social redress and a life of dignity to castes, tribes and classes which were in a historical sense oppressed by a systemic - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 pattern of social exclusion and human deprivation. The benefits which the Constitution has conferred on beneficiary groups cannot be dissipated by allowing others who do not belong to the designated castes or tribes to secure the benefit. Public employment is a significant source of social mobility. Access to education opens the doors to secure futures. As a matter of principle, in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction, the court must weigh against an interpretation which will protect unjust claims over the just, fraud over legality and expediency over principle. As the nation evolves, the role of the court must be as an institution which abides by constitutional principle, enforces the rule of law and reaffirms the belief that claims based upon fraud, expediency and subterfuge will not be recognised. Once these parameters are established with a clear judicial formulation, individual cases should pose no problem. Usurpation of constitutional benefits by persons who are not entitled to them must be answered by the court in the only way permissible for an institution which has to uphold the rule of law. Unless the courts were to do so, it would leave open a path of incentives for claims based on fraud to survive legal gambits and the creativity of the disingenuous. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 ……….. 56. Service under the Union and the States, or for that matter under the instrumentalities of the State subserves a public purpose. These services are instruments of governance. Where the State embarks upon public employment, it is under the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 to follow the principle of equal opportunity. Affirmative action in our Constitution is part of the quest for substantive equality. Available resources and the opportunities provided in the form of public employment are in contemporary times short of demands and needs. Hence, the procedure for selection, and the prescription of eligibility criteria has a significant public element in enabling the State to make a choice amongst competing claims. The selection of ineligible persons is a manifestation of a systemic failure and has a deleterious effect on good governance. Firstly, selection of a person who is not eligible allows someone who is ineligible to gain access to scarce public resources. Secondly, the rights of eligible persons are violated since a person who is not eligible for the post is selected. Thirdly, an illegality is perpetrated by bestowing benefits upon an imposter undeservingly. These effects upon good governance find a similar echo when a person who does not belong to a reserved category - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 passes of as a member of that category and obtains admission to an educational institution. Those for whom the Constitution has made special provisions are as a result ousted when an imposter who does not belong to a reserved category is selected. The fraud on the Constitution precisely lies in this. Such a consequence must be avoided and stringent steps be taken by the Court to ensure that unjust claims of imposters are not protected in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142. The nation cannot live on a lie. Courts play a vital institutional role in preserving the rule of law. The judicial process should not be allowed to be utilised to protect the unscrupulous and to preserve the benefits which have accrued to an imposter on the specious plea of equity. Once the legislature has stepped in, by enacting Maharashtra Act 23 of 2001, the power under Article 142 should not be exercised to defeat legislative prescription. The Constitution Bench in Milind [State of Maharashtra v. Milind, (2001) 1 SCC 4 : 2001 SCC (L&S) 117] spoke on 28-11- 2000. The State law has been enforced from 18-10- 2001. Judicial directions must be consistent with law. Several decisions of two-Judge Benches noticed earlier, failed to take note of Maharashtra Act 23 of 2001. The directions which were issued under Article 142 were on the erroneous inarticulate premise that the area was unregulated - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 by statute. Shalini [Shalini v. New English High School Assn., (2013) 16 SCC 526 : (2014) 3 SCC (L&S) 265] noted the statute but misconstrued it. The Apex Court in the case of EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF BHALGORA AREA (NOW KUSTORE AREA) OF BHARAT COKING COAL vs. WORKMEN BEING REPRESENTED BY JANATA MAZDOOR SANGH reported in (2021) 10 SCC 717 held that, fraudulent practice to gain public appointment cannot be permitted by law. The relevant portion is extracted below: “18. Fraudulent practice to gain public employment cannot be countenanced to be permitted by a court of law. The workmen here, having hoodwinked the government undertaking in a fraudulent manner, must be prevented from enjoying the fruits of their ill-gotten advantage. The sanctity of public employment, as a measure of social welfare and a significant source of social mobility, must be protected against such fraudulent process which manipulates and corrupts the selection process. Employment schemes floated by the State for targeted groups, can absorb a finite number of workmen. To abuse the legitimate process, therefore, would mean deprivation of employment benefits to - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 rightful beneficiaries. The courts as sentinel of justice must strive to ensure that such employment programmes are not manipulated by deceitful middlemen, thereby setting up a parallel mechanism of Faustian Bargain. Often, desperate job aspirants resort to such measures to compete for limited vacancies, but this Court cannot condone false projections so as to circumvent the statutorily prescribed procedure for appointments. Such illegal practices must be interdicted by the courts.” 12. In the case on hand, the appointment of the petitioner was void from the inception. Such an appointment is no appointment in law. The Apex Court in the case of R.VISHWANATHA PILLAI vs. STATE OF KERALA reported in (2004) 2 SCC 105 held that, if the appointment is void from the inception, the eqnuiy is not necessary. The relevant paragraph is extracted below: “15. This apart, the appellant obtained the appointment in the service on the basis that he belonged to a Scheduled Caste community. When it was found by the Scrutiny Committee that he did not belong to the Scheduled Caste community, then the very basis of his appointment was taken away. His appointment - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 was no appointment in the eye of the law. He cannot claim a right to the post as he had usurped the post meant for a reserved candidate by playing a fraud and producing a false caste certificate. Unless the appellant can lay a claim to the post on the basis of his appointment he cannot claim the constitutional guarantee given under Article 311 of the Constitution. As he had obtained the appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate he cannot be considered to be a person who holds a post within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. Finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee that the appellant got the appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate has become final. The position, therefore, is that the appellant has usurped the post which should have gone to a member of the Scheduled Castes. In view of the finding recorded by the Scrutiny Committee and upheld up to this Court, he has disqualified himself to hold the post. The appointment was void from its inception. It cannot be said that the said void appointment would enable the appellant to claim that he was holding a civil post within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. As the appellant had obtained the appointment by playing a fraud, he cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own fraud in entering the service and claim that he was holder of the post entitled to be dealt with in terms of Article 311 of the Constitution of India or the Rules framed thereunder. Where an appointment in a service has been acquired by practising fraud or deceit, such an appointment is no - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 appointment in law, in service and in such a situation Article 311 of the Constitution is not attracted at all.” 13. Since the probationary period of the petitioners has not been confirmed, the question of conducting a detailed enquiry would not arise. By the impugned order dated 22.04.2025, the petitioners were relieved from the service after giving notice to the petitioners and after considering their reply. 14. The judgment relied upon by the petitioner in MD.ZAMIL AHMED (supra), is the case of appointment on compassionate grounds to the brother of the deceased. Under the Rules, ‘brother’ is not included in the definition of dependent, and while seeking compassionate appointment, he has not furnished any false or incorrect declaration. On the other hand, they have disclosed the conditions prevailing in the family of the deceased. Therefore, the Apex Court set aside the termination order. - 23 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25348 WP No. 14860 of 2025 C/W WP No. 14871 of 2025 WP No. 14872 of 2025 15. In the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of UDAY PRATAP SINGH (supra), it is a case of compassionate appointment where there was no concealment of facts at the time of the said appointment. Since the appellant worked for 19 years, the Allahabad High Court set aside the termination order. The above judgments are not applicable to the facts of the case. 16. In view of what is stated above, the petitioners have not made out any case. The petitions are devoid of merit. Accordingly, writ petitions are dismissed. In view of disposal of the petitions, all pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 76