High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri R Yathish vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri R Yathish vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 November, 2010
Author: V.Jagannathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

Dated: This the 161" day of November 20.10:

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE V.JAGANi$IIITI%iJ3R_ '

VV.P.NO.34009/2010  '   "   'V, I 1}

B ETWEEN:

SR1 R YATHISH, 
S/O LATE RANGASWAMY,  '
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS. f _  , 
R/AT A K COLONY, OPB:ONEwi1B1US'--SjTAND,
CHANNARAYAPATNA, HAs_sAN DISTRiC_T.__ 

  -  "  '    PETITIONER

(By Sri M__S   1-SR1  1:-RVIRRESH, ADVS.)

1 . 'I'HE.sT-ATE. 
DEIé>AR.TMENT'OE"BR1MARY EDUCATION.
REP "BY "ITS jSECRETARY.
4;: ' 'VIKASA-SOUDHA, BANGALORE~56O 001.

 I , THETHDIRECTOR FOR PRIMARY EDUCATION,

I _ 'OFFICE' OF THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC
I 'INSTRIJC'TIONS, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BANQ«AiLORE--56O 001.

3. 2 .. TLIE' DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF' PUBLIC
INSTRUC'1'1ONS, HASSAN DISTRICT,

" '  HASSAN.

T34.' H NAVODAYA VIDYA SAMSTHE ®

CHANNARAYAPA"I'NA--573 116.
HASSAN DISTRICT.
 RESPONDENTS

(By Sri JAGADEESH MUNDARGI, GA.)

THIS WP FILED PRAYING TO CALL
FROM THE RESPONDENTS & DIRECT ~
APPOINTMENT OF THE PEnnoNI5;R TO Posfr’
IN NAVODAYA
DODDAKUNCHE, HoLENARAsII5UVR}2_iTo. HA_ss.A:\T
BY THE R4 AS PER APPoI;\IT”MzI«:NT’-onoERfo’r:’1«2..,1o.Io.
VIDE ANN–J IS ARBITRARY <'3t°iI_#i;E§}AL: '

THIS PE'I'ITION . .'Co1\§_IN.o; . :}*o.R PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY; MADE THE
FOLLOWIN(f::*.._ I '

omma
'counseifor the petitioner and the
learned Advocate who is directed to take

notice foéfrespondentisii 1 to 3.

S1Ztb1'fliS'SiOI1 of the petitioner's counsel is

V the death of petitioner's father while

service, the petitioner sought for

app'oin~tment on compassionate grounds and the

'tljeputy Director by order dated 16.7.2010 directed

the 491 respondent to appoint the petitioner to the

post of Second Division Assistant on compassionate

27

v4

grounds. However, the 4″? respondent has issued-._the

appointment order in respect of Group-DAV.rp’est’*44and«3

hence this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel ;the’7_’petitieoneri’

referring to the order of the’_Depu.tv’-Director.’vvhichis

produced at Annexure~I:1i’,’~.. that the
petitioner is entit1edA..fo_r be-éingdappointed to the post of
Second Division Assistant eoinpassionate grounds

and though issued in this

regard;”‘itheii:,4tIi::frespon’deIit’_”djd4 not comply with the
said direction; other hand, permitted the
petitioner” ‘totjoj as’; “grou p employee.

._pIn thtewléight of the aforesaid submission

hearing learned Government Advocate

this’ and this court also on an earlier

.. occasion while disposing of W.P.Nos.7818–7819/2010

it directed the respondent to consider the

Vdapplication of the petitioner, under these

circumstances, the respondents are directed to

3/?”

reconsider the matter and if the petitioner is entitled

to the post of Second Division Assisptalnt

compassionate grounds, particularly in the

the recommendations made by”the”Dep–.uty«

Annexure–H, the authorities therefore are_”_di1″vecte’cltoV’

consider the aforesaid oi in
accordance with also
directed to take and issue
necessary ” law and shall
petitioner for appointment
to th-¢ post Assistant Within a
period the date of receipt of this

0_r’d.61f..,l. 2 « _____ .. e

Government Advocate is permitted to

” appearance within three weeks.

Sd/-

JUDGE

V’p;Dvr: