- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 19584 OF 2021 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI K.M. SADASHIVA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS SON OF LATE K MARI THIMMAIAH KYATHANABEEDU LAKYA - 577168 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT 2. SMT NINGAMMA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS WIFE OF LATE K MARI THIMMAIAH KYATHANABEEDU LAKYA – 577168 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B V SHANKARA NARAYANA RAO, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. RAVI KUMAR K N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CANARA BANK WHOLLY OWNED BY THE GOVT OF INDIA HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 6648, 112 J C ROAD, P B HALSURPETE NAGARATHPETE BENGALURU - 560002 KARNATAKA Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 REP. BY MD & CEO 2. THE DEPUTY GENERALMANAGER CANARA BANK HRM SECTION, CIRCLE OFFICE HOSA/SAS/ INSP WING MANGALURU 575006 3. THE MANAGER / SENIOR MANAGER CANARA BANK GUDUGALELE KODAGU DISTRICT - 571235 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER QUASHING ENDORSEMENT BEARING No. MGG/HRM/6943/2017-18 DATED 15.3.2018 ANNEXURE-D AND ENDORSEMENT HRWPM/63A/7476/2020/SMS DATED 9.11.2020 ANENXURE-F WHILE DECLARING THE SAME TO BE ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND NON-EST IN LAW. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER DIRECTING ALL THE RESPONDENTS TO GRANT APPOINTMENT TO THE P-1 ON COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS AS PER THE PREVAILING SCHEME WITHOUT BROOKING ANY FURTHER DELAY IN THE MATTER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: (1) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing Endorsement bearing No.MGC/HRM/6943/2017- 18 dated 15.03.2018 (Annexure-D) and Endorsement dated HRWPM/63A/7476/2020/SMS dated 09.11.2020 (Annexure-F) while declaring the same to be arbitrary, illegal and non-est in law. (2) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing all the respondents to grant appointment to the petitioner No.1 on compassionate grounds as per the prevailing scheme without brooking any further delay in the matter, in the interest of justice and equity. (3) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem it fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: Father of petitioner No.1 was served in the respondent-Bank, and he passed away on 18.10.2015. After his demise, the petitioners have submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds. The said application came to be rejected vide Annexure-F stating that there is no financial distress to the family of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. 3. The respondent filed the statement of objections contending that the father of petitioner No.1 was working in the respondent-Bank and he passed away on 18.10.2015 leaving behind his wife, petitioner No.2, one daughter and two sons including petitioner No.1. After the death of the employee, the family has received the terminal benefits of Rs.12,80,201.86. The petitioners are not in a financial distress. It is contended that the compassionate appointment can be granted only to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 family, who is in financial distress. The petitioner's family is not in financial distress and has rejected the application. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and also learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits the respondents have issued an endorsement vide Annexure-F without assigning any reasons and without holding any enquiry whether the family of the petitioners is having sufficient source of income for their livelihood. He submits that the impugned order passed by the respondents is a cryptic and non-application of mind. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition by quashing Annexure-F and direct the respondents to re-consider the application of petitioner No.1 for appointment on compassionate ground. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1-Bank submits that, after the demise of the employee, the family has received more than Rs.12,80,201.86 from the Bank and there is no financial distress. The respondent-Bank has rightly issued an endorsement. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. It is an undisputed fact that the father of the petitioner was working in the respondent-Bank and he passed away on 18.10.2015 leaving behind him, his wife, daughter, two sons including petitioner No.1. After the demise of the father of petitioner No.1, the petitioners have submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground alleging that their family is in a financial distress. The respondent has issued an - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 endorsement vide Annexure-F. The application of the petitioner was rejected only on the ground that the family has got terminal benefits. There is no mitigating factor to consider the request for the compassionate appointment. The respondents have not assigned any reasons for rejecting an application. 9. In order to consider the application for appointment on compassionate ground, the following conditions has to be fulfilled: i. The family of the deceased employee should be in a financial crisis or destitution; ii. Recurring monthly income from all sources other than family pension, lumpsum pensionary benefits and the interest earned thereon, of the family for the purpose of this rule shall be computed by the Head of the Office or the Head of the Department or the appointing authority; iii. On the basis of the last annual property return filed by the deceased employee and if, for any reasons, it is not available, on the basis of a certificate of income issued by a Revenue Officer not below the rank of the Tahsildar; and iv. In case of any member of the family of the deceased employee is self-employed in any - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 other undertaking or establishment in such circumstances. 10. From the perusal of the said impugned order, respondent No.1 has not considered the said aspect and proceeded to issue endorsement vide Annexure-F. The impugned endorsement issued by the respondent is arbitrary and erroneous and without application of mind. Hence, on this ground, alone the impugned endorsement is liable to be quashed. 11. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is allowed. ii. The impugned endorsement dated 09.11.2020 vide Annexure-F is hereby quashed. iii. The respondents are directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner in terms of the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35987 WP No. 19584 of 2021 scheme of the respondent-Bank and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. iv. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. v. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB