High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Rathnamma vs The Union Of India Ministry Of … on 4 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Rathnamma vs The Union Of India Ministry Of … on 4 November, 2008
Author: Anand Byrareddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAI_fi}RE

DATED THIS THE 4*" DAY 01: NOVEMBER  %

BEFORE:

THE H{)N'BLE MR. JUSTICE    L

WRIT PETITION No.6249    = '  

BETWEEN :

1. Sml. Ralhnamma, 43 yréazs  _  .  _ 
W/0 Late K. V. Gangadhar . * A} V V

2. Sri. G. Ani1:;;;ma};' 24   
Sin I..a te K; V. ., ' -

Both areuR;:sidVin:g at  " ..
Vae::':hhadré:;hwm'a Témple
 , '  I3<xida3<£iffi3av.i:lI"a
  " " .Ch'§kk.?£baII§a;1ma Town
 % .vKhla;"3)is{:tic§."   Pmnromks

(ByS%h:?i.  r.;:¢m, Advocac)

 =... A,ND:

'V      uflndia

  'Ministxy of Agricuiturc
   ..Dt:parlmcn£ of
Agriculture and Cooperafion
Shaslri Bhavan
New Delhi



2. The Chief Sui! Survey Officer
All India Soil and Land Use

Survey, I.A.R.I. Buildings
New Delhi~12

3. The Chief Land Use, Survey T.
All India. Soil and Land Use " 

Survey, E Block _ V
Phatnli Tnwn-ship       
Kulkalw-921 7    1'  RES'P()NDENTS

(By Shri- N. Amzirgzsh,  Standing
Cmmsel for Rcsspqnelentzjs  1  '\E~Tri't Petition dismissed
against Rc3pQné§cn'§Ng3. .3 "viii; 'Ordi::t_ d'ated--6.8.2008)

  aas.=_o==Ivs'==I==  .

lfhis   Aflielas 226 and 227 of the
Constittiiqiog Of _It:~:i'i:; ~;x;:i3zi;i'g__ to quash the Order passed by
RcspondcI2iLN:3. Zzlaiaii 8§'i~.1_7£005 Vida: Anncxurc F.

_i 'This Writ-.  coming on for Hearing this day, the

 V'  --.C0ti!;f':fia{i€"ti13 following: -

ORDER

A Tht: coming an for Praiiminary Hearing (B Group)

for final disposal having regard to the facis and

i’:.:iIii.:uinslances.

2. The peiiiiuncrs am the widuw and son of an

employt.-.6 of the thin! rcspundtsnl. The ductzascd whu is said In

5

3
have died as on 25.04.2002 was employed as a diiver with the

Iespondent and he was said to be the sole bxeadwinner of the
fiimily. On his death, the petitioners made an applic.-itisin on

30.082002 seeking to provide an appointment on

grounds in Group C or D. The second petitionetf

driver and he has passed SSLC

appointment as a driver. Since ii’i6«.ft3Sp()t!tit3t’ii did ‘ti(;é.t: consider tizei >

case of the petitioner, the Court by

way ofa_w1′–_it’ petiéioii’i;ti”iitit;vP.i’Jo.3l232t’2{X}4. The same was

allowed afte; ‘ the respondents were directed to

V. p_ conttiiierv tif1z*.ease’o{‘. petitioners. Pursuant to the direction, the

rest” ndents now ssed an older, which is reduced at

respondents would state that the appointment on

‘v..eompa:§siot1ate grounds can be made upto a maximum of 5% of

falling under direct recruitment quota in any Group C

D post- As per the guidelines by which the respondents are

i governed and as now no such vacant post under the quota of

compassionate grounds is vacagin any of the centre of the

5
petitioner being true of the applicants at serial N08 who is

awaiting his turn, them is no warrant for inEerfcren}:e,’T~.V_this

Court. It goes without saying if in the even!

the petitioner, the respondents Wtkuld… li}«.

appointment on Qompassiunale gmuniih-Vz.

helpless in pmvidirig such app-:V)1§*:.i:»:.i;:,énl the?)

order at :w()§£l&”_Warranl inlcrfcrenoc of

ihiz-; Cou1fl__V[in”».Viq[;s– ‘ this observation, [hit

petiLi0n:’12:;La1ad:;<Viif:;pif;2a::z:§L'.giiij–~., %

Sd/~
Iudge