Preetish K S v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3756 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN:

PREETISH K S, S/O LATE K. SOMASHEKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT-NO.32, "SOMASHEKAR", 1ST MAIN, RELIABLE LAYOUT NEAR SRI. SAI LAYOUT, PUTTASWAMAYYANAPALYA SATYAMANGALA MAIN ROAD, SIRA GATE, TUMAKURU-572106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NATARAJ G, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001, REPTD. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

¶2THE DIRECTOR, PRE-UNIVERSITY BOARD, SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF PETITIONER FOR COMPASSIONATE GROUND APPOINTMENT BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 22.09.2025 AND 28.11.2025 VIDE ANNEXURES-H AND J.

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before the Court seeking the following prayers: "a) Issue Writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the respondent No.1 to consider the case of petitioner for compassionate ground appointment by considering the representation dated 22.09.2025 and 28.11.2025 vide Annexure-H and J in the interest of justice and equity. b) And to pass such other order or directions as deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice."

¶2Heard Sri.Nataraj G, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Rashmi Rao, learned HCGP appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record.

¶3Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

3.1. The father of the petitioner was working as Kannada lecturer in Ranganatha Pre-University College, Sira, Tumakuru district, dies in harness on 13.10.2017. Pursuant to the death

of the sole bread winner of the family, the petitioner-the son submits an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds on 04.06.2018. The respondent No.2 in terms of the correspondence dated 10.07.2018, directed the mother to file an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. In the light of the mother's entitlement being over and above the petitioner, the mother then submits an application. For about 5 to 7 years, nothing has happened and therefore, on

22.09.2025, a representation is made to respondent No.2 to consider the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. That having gone unheeded, petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition seeking a direction for consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of the representation so submitted.

¶4Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would reiterate the contents of both the representations dated

22.09.2025 and 28.11.2025 and would seek this Court to issue

a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds.

¶5Learned HCGP would, however, refute the submission contending that compassionate appointment is not a matter of right but if the representations are not considered, they would merit consideration within the time frame that this Court would fix.

¶6In the light of the said submission and the contra submission, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. As the application is given seven years ago to the hands of respondent No.2 which has not met its consideration and in the case of compassionate appointment, it is the Circulars issued by the State itself that those applications should merit consideration within one year from the date of its submission. Seven years have passed by. Therefore, the State shall consider the representation(s) within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law, bearing in mind

the law that is now prevalent with regard to grant of compassionate appointment.

Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

CBC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16