Sri Manjunath D v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:678( WP(No.(70(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(7 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(H.T.(NARENDRA(PRASAD( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(70(OF(2026((S-RES)( BETWEEN:(( SRI,MANJUNATH,D, S/O,LATE,DIVAKAR, AGED,ABOUT,37,YEARS., R/O,NO.,A54/A,,OFFICIAL,COLONY,, K,R,SAGAR,,SRIRANGAPATTANA,TALUK,, HONGAHALLI,KRISHNARAJA,SAGAR,, MANDYA,,KARNATAKA,571,607,

…PETITIONER,

(BY,SMT,,NIREEKSHA,D.J.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,, SRI.,SHOWRI,H,R.,,ADVOCATE), AND:(

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,

DEPARTMENT,OF,TOURISM,, REP.,BY,ITS,PRINCIPLE,SECRETARY,, VIKAS,SOUDHA,,BENGALURU,560,001.,

,Digitallytisignedtiby HEMALATHA0A 2., KARNATAKA,STATE,TOURISM,, Location:0HIGH DEVELOPMENT,CORPORATION, COURTOF EXECUTIVE,OFFICE,,GROUND,FLOOR,,KARNATAKA YESHWANTHPUR,TTMC,,B.M.T.C,BUS,STAND, YESHWANTPUR,CIRCLE,,BENGALURU,560,022, REP.,BY,CHIEF,EXECUTIVE(ADMINISTRATION), …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SPOORTHY,HEGDE,,HCGP,FOR,R-1), , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,226,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE,, IMPUGNED, ENDORSEMENT, BEARING, NO.KARAPRAANI/, ADALITHA/,108/2021-22/2633,DATED:,28.03.2022,ISSUED,BY, THE,R-2,AT,ANNEXURE-A,AND,ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶1In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question endorsement dated 28/31.03.2022 issued by the respondent No.2 (Annexure-A) whereby the application filed by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground came to be rejected on the ground that it was filed beyond the prescribed period of one year from the date of death of the Government servant.

¶2Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner's father, Late Sri Divakara, was appointed as Moto Boat Driver at Krishna Raj Sagar on 22.01.1981. He died on

27.02.2010 while he was in service, leaving behind his wife, Smt.Saradamma, daughter Ms.Suchithra and petitioner herein as his legal heirs. The petitioner submitted an application on 18.05.2011 seeking

appointment on compassionate ground. Copy of application is produced as Annexure-D. As no action was taken by respondent No.2 on the said application, petitioner's mother submitted another application dated

03.03.2022 (Annexure-G) requesting that compassionate appointment be granted to petitioner. By impugned endorsement, the request of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the application is filed beyond limitation period of one year. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶3Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that although petitioner has filed an application on 18.05.2011 seeking appointment on compassion ground, the respondent No.2 has not taken any action thereon. The impugned endorsement has been issued on the basis of the subsequent application dated 03.03.2022 filed by the mother of

the petitioner. It is contended that since no action has been taken on previous application dated

18.05.2011 filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.2 is estopped from rejecting the application of the petitioner. In support of her contention, she has relied upon the Division Bench decision of this Court passed in W.P.No.202187/2023 disposed of on 25.07.2025. Accordingly, she sought for allowing the writ petition.

¶4Learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 has submitted that as per Rule 5 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules'), an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground has to be filed within one year from the date of death of the government servant. Since the application of the petitioner was filed beyond said period, respondent No.2 was justified in rejecting the

application of the petitioner. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶5Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Perused the writ papers.

¶6It is not in dispute that the petitioner's father, namely, Late Sri Divakara, was appointed as Moto Boat Driver at Krishna Raj Sagar on 22.01.1981. He died on 27.02.2010 while he was in service. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner first submitted an application on 18.05.2011 seeking appointment on compassionate ground. Thereafter, the mother of the petitioner has filed subsequent application on

03.03.2022 requesting that compassionate appointment be granted to the petitioner.

¶7Rule 5 of the Rules mandates that every dependent of a deceased government servant, seeking

appointment under compassionate ground shall make an application within one year from the date of death of the government servant.

¶8In the case on hand, the Government servant i.e., Divakara died on 27.02.2010 whereas the petitioner has filed the application on 18.05.2011 seeking appointment on compassionate ground, which is beyond the prescribed period of one year. Hence, the application itself is not maintainable as per Rule 5 of the Rules.

¶9Further, the decision relied upon by the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the case as the application itself has been filed beyond the statutory period of one year and it is well settled that there can be no estoppel against a statute.

¶10In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the respondent No.2 was justified in rejecting the

application on the ground of delay. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the respondent No.2.

¶11The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.

¶12In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, all pending interlocutory applications stand disposed of.

Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 13