- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.109772 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. UMA W/O. LATE TIPPANNA KOTI BEFORE MARRIAGE UMA D/O. MALLAPPA KALE, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O. LIG-80, KHB COLONY AMARAGOL, BEHIND METRO, BALAJI NAGAR, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHWANATH S.BICHAGATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHARWAD, 2ND CROSS, KALYAN NAGAR ROAD, DC OFFICE, DC COMPOUND, DHARWAD-580001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DHARWAD, 2ND CROSS, KALYAN NAGAR ROAD, DC OFFICE, DC COMPOUND, MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.01.20 15:21:15 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 DHARWAD-580001. 4. THE TAHASILDAR NAVALGUND, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, IBRAIM PUR ROAD, NAVALGUND, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-582208. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTIONS QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. ¹§âA¢/«ªÀ/38/2024-25/T-558 DATED 22.09.2025 AT ANNEXURE-H PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 REJECTING THE APPLICATION SEEKING COMPENSATORY APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO HER HUSBAND DEATH; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTIONS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 AND RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER AT ANNEXURE-G DATED 11.07.2024, ANNEXURE-G1 DATED 16.06.2025 AND ANNEXURE-G2 DATED 28.07.2025 THEREBY CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION SEEKING FOR COMPENSATORY APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO HER HUSBAND DEATH AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner, who is the wife of the deceased Government employee, Tippanna Koti, has approached this Court calling in question the order dated 22.09.2025 (Annexure-H) passed by respondent No.4 – Tahasildar, whereby the application seeking compassionate appointment came to be rejected, and further seeks a direction to respondents Nos.2 and 4 to consider the representation seeking compassionate appointment. 3. Brief facts:- The petitioner's husband by name Tipanna Fakeerappa Koti was appointed as a Village Accountant in the year 2002, and was serving in the Department of Revenue as on the date of his death. He suffered from neurological disorder and succumbed on 16.07.2023. The petitioner being wholly dependent on the deceased, submitted an - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 application seeking compassionate appointment on 11.07.2024. Respondent No.4, by the impugned order dated 22.09.2025, rejected the said application on the ground that a criminal proceedings has been registered at the instance of the petitioner’s sister-in-law, in which the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.4, and that a charge- sheet had been filed. Aggrieved by the said endorsement/rejection, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents/State and perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal proceeding relied upon by the authority arise out of a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner’s brother and his wife, wherein the petitioner has been implicated as accused No.4 for the offences punishable - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 Sections 323, 498A, 504, and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended that the impugned order proceeds on a complete misinterpretation of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996. 6. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents/State justifies the impugned order and submits that the same does not warrant interference by this Court. It is submitted that compassionate appointment is not a matter of right and that authority has exercised its discretion in accordance with law. 7. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the impugned order. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads thus: “CzÀAgÀAvÉ ¸ÀzÀj ¤ªÀÄä PÀqÀvÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄPÁÌV ªÀiÁ£Àå G¥À«¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ zsÁgÀªÁqÀ EªÀjUÉ ¸ÀªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå ¢£ÁAPÀ: 16-06-2025 gÀAzÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸À¯ÁV, ªÀiÁ£ÀågÀÄ C¨sÀåyðAiÀÄ ªÉÄÃ¯É «dAiÀÄ¥ÀÅgÀ ¥Éǰøï oÁuÉ UÀÄ£Áß £ÀA. 450/2023 PÀ®A 323, 498 (J) 504, 506 ¸ÀºÀ PÀ®A 34 L¦¹ £ÉÃzÀÝgÀr ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR¯ÁVgÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹zÀÄÝ - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjPÀ ¸ÉêÁ (C£ÀÄPÀA¥À £ÉêÀÄPÁw) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀAvÉ G¯ÉèÃR(4)gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¸ÀÆa¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀiÁ£Àå G¥À«¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ zsÁgÀªÁqÀgÀªÀgÀ ¤zÉÃð±À£ÀzÀAvÉ, G¯ÉèÃR (5)gÀ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÉUÀ¼ÀÄ (C£ÀÄPÀA¥À DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÉêÀÄPÁw) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ 1966 gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV, ¸ÀzÀj £ÉêÀÄPÁw ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼À°è [Cfð ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ªÀÄÈvÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£À£ÀÄß PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀAvÀºÀ CxÀªÁ Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ¥ÀæPÀgÀt vÀ¤SÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ CxÀªÁ CAvÀºÀ C¥ÀgÁzsÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä zÀĵÉàçÃgÀuÉ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ DgÉÆÃ¥ÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄÄ £ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛgÀĪÀ ªÀåQÛAiÀÄÄ, F ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼À CrAiÀÄ°è £ÉêÀÄPÁwUÉ CºÀð£ÁVgÀvÀPÀÌzÀÝ®è] CAvÁ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. PÁgÀt ªÀiÁ£Àå 4£Éà ºÉZÀÄѪÀj ¹«¯ï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ eÉJªÀiï J¥sï¹ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ «dAiÀÄ¥ÀÅgÀ gÀªÀgÀ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¹¹ £ÀA.2975/2024 ¤ªÀÄä ªÉÄÃ¯É ZÁ°ÛAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀzÀjAzÀ G¯ÉèÃR (5) gÀ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÉUÀ¼ÀÄ (C£ÀÄPÀA¥À DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÉêÀÄPÁw) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ 1966 gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤ÃªÀÅ C£ÀÄPÀA¥À DzsÁgÀ £ÉêÀÄPÁwUÁV CºÀðjgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. PÁgÀt C£ÀÄPÀA¥À DzsÁgÀ £ÉêÀÄPÁwAiÀÄ ¤ªÀÄä CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¯ÉUÉ ºÁPÀ¯ÁVzÉ.” emphasis supplied. 8. The rejection of the petitioner’s application is founded solely on a premise that a criminal case is pending against her. Sub-Rule 4 of Rule 3 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 (‘Rules 1996’ for short) reads thus: “A person against whom at the time of making an application a criminal case is under investigation or trial, on the charge of having committed murder of the deceased Government servant or for abetting the commission of such offence shall not be eligible for appointment under these Rules.” - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 9. A plain reading of the above provision makes it abundantly clear that disqualification is attracted only in cases where the applicant is facing criminal proceedings relating to the murder of the deceased Government servant or abetment thereof. The Rule does not contemplate disqualification on account of criminal proceedings initiated by a third party in respect of unrelated offences. 10. In the present case, the criminal proceedings relied upon by respondent No.4 are admittedly not in relation to the death of the deceased Government servant, nor do they pertain to any allegation of murder abetment thereof. Therefore, the petitioner does not fall within the category of ineligible persons under Sub-Rule (4) of the Rule 3 of Rules 1996 governing compassionate appointment. The rejection of the petitioner’s application on such ground is unsustainable in law and warrants interference. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 11. The impugned order demonstrates a clear misinterpretation of the statutory Rules. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed in part. ii. Impugned endorsement dated 22.09.2025 (Annexure-H) passed by respondent No.4 is hereby quashed being contrary to Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 3 of the Rules 1996. iii. Respondent No.4 is directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment, without taking into criminal case referred in the impugned order and to assess her eligibility in accordance with Rules, 1996. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:95 WP No. 109772 of 2025 iv. Such reconsideration shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AM/- Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11