Compassionate appointments must be based on qualifications applicable at the time of application, and once an appointment is made, further claims for higher posts are not permitted.

ORDER :

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT)

The above writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the State Authorities in Forest Department is directed against the order dated 18.03.2024 passed in Application No.10874/2023 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), whereunder the respondent’s application is allowed directing to consider the representation filed by the applicant on 09.05.2023 and pass orders in providing appointment to the post of Second Division Assistant (SDA).

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the respondent’s husband, Sri. Shivakumar Gangadhar Badiger, who was working as SDA in the office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Karnataka State Forest Academy, Dharwad, while in service died on 10.01.2021. The respondent submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment on 06.12.2021 enclosing SSLC marks card and necessary certificates. The respondent passed II Year Pre-University Course examination in April, 2023 and immediately, thereafter on 09.05.2023, the respondent is said to have made a representation to consider her case for compassionate appointment as SDA. However, the petitioners considering the application of the respondent dated 06.12.2021 and taking note of the qualification of the respondent as on the date of her first representation, appointed her as Group-D employee vide order dated 07.10.2023, which the respondent accepted and she is working in the Forest Department. Prior to her appointment as Group-D employee, under the endorsement dated 16.08.2023, the respondent‘s request for appointing her as SDA was rejected stating that, as on the date of her application within the time prescribed under the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the 1996 Rules’), the respondent was not possessing the qualification of PUC. Questioning the said endorsement, the respondent was before the Tribunal in the above Application No.10874/2023. The Tribunal, under the impugned order, allowed the application placing reliance on Circular dated 27.10.2017 and holding that the application for compassionate appointment shall be considered in terms of the Rules applicable as on the date of consideration of the application. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the State authorities in Forest Department are before this Court.

3. Heard Sri. G.K.Hiregoudar, learned Principal Government Advocate for the petitioners, and Sri. H.M.Dharigond, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the entire writ petition papers.

4. Learned Prl. Government Advocate would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in allowing the application and directing to provide appointment as SDA to the respondent. He submits that the appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be claimed as a matter of right, and, further placing reliance on Rule 6(4) of the 1996 Rules, submits that appointment once made under the Rules shall be final and no fresh appointment to a different post or higher post would be permissible. Learned Government Advocate would submit that, in terms of Rule 5 of the 1996 Rules, an application seeking compassionate appointment shall be made within one year from the date of death of the government servant and, in the case of a minor, he must have attained the age of 18 years within two years from the date of death of the government servant and he must make an application within two years thereafter. The respondent submitted the application on 06.12.2021 and, as on the said date, the respondent possessed the qualification of SSLC only and she was not eligible for consideration of her candidature for appointment as SD