Sanjukumar S/O Late Chandrappa Kuddannavar vs. The Belgaum District Central Co0operative Bank Lt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

Dated this the 3rd day of June 2013

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA

Writ Petition No.6542/2008 (S-Res)

Between:

Sanjukumar, S/o. late Chandrappa Kuddannavar, Aged about 21 years, R/o. Plot No.8, 4th cross, Shirshi Colony, Bhagyanagar, Belgaum. …Petitioner

(By Sri. S.P.Kulkarni, Advocate)

A n d :

• 1. The Belgaum District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., H.O. Near Central Bus Stand, Belgaum-590016. Reptd. by its General Manager,
• 2. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Belgaum District, Belgaum.
• 3. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, No.1, Ali Askar Road, Bangalore-560002. ...Respondents

(By Sri. B.S.Kamate, Advocate for R1 Sri. Y.V.Raviraj, Addl. Govt. Advocate for R2 and R3)

This petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 21.01.2008 passed by R3 herein being arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to law equity and justice (Annexure-L) and etc.

This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B' Group this day, the Court made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court praying that the order dated 21.01.2008 be quashed and a mandamus be issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds.

2. The petitioner contends that his father viz., Chandrappa Kuddannavar was working as a peon in the respondent-Bank. The father of the petitioner died in harness on 28.03.2004. The petitioner is, therefore, stated to have made an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. Such application was made on 02.07.2004. Since the same

did not evoke any response, the petitioner is also stated to have approached the Chief Minister seeking redressal of his grievance. On the request of the petitioner being forwarded through the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent-Bank has issued the impugned communication dated 21.01.2008 by which they have indicated that the request of the petitioner for appointment cannot be considered as it would have adverse effect on the finance of the 1st respondent-Bank if such appointments are made.

3. The petitioner is assailing the said communication as not being sustainable in view of the fact that the respondent-Bank has issued the notification dated 02.03.2008 calling for application to fill up the post indicated therein. It is, therefore, contended that the reason assigned by the 1st respondent-Bank to reject the case of the petitioner

would not be sustainable and a direction has to be issued to consider the application of the petitioner.

4. Having noticed the said contentions, the position of law relating to appointment of compassionate grounds is well-settled inasmuch as the appointment on compassionate grounds is not a regular appointment but an appointment which would be made de hors the rule prescribed for regular appointment. Therefore, the considerations for such appointment is not merely the death of a person who was in employment but also the financial status of the person and the availability of the posts as also the regulations in that regard. In the instant case, though the petitioner contends that, in view of the notification dated 02.03.2008 the reason assigned for rejecting the case of the petitioner is not justified, it is to be noticed that the father of the petitioner had died in the year 2004 and sufficient time had elapsed and also the

financial stringency of the petitioner at the juncture when the petition was filed is also not available. Therefore, for the said reason, the relief prayed for in the instant petition cannot be granted.

Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Kms