IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 107272 OF 2024 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

SHRI. SANTOSH V.HOSAMANI S/O. LATE VITTAL, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. 1^ST CROSS, GOKUL NAGAR, NILAJI/MUTAGA-591 124, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.B.KONI AND SRI DEEPAK S.KULKARNI, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DbEyig MitaAlNyJ AsiNgnNeAd TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND M E ANJANNA LCKDBD2105 o E AO H a c 2: tN RU 2 A e a 6 N 1 C: R tR . i 0: A H o W T 11 n T 5. O A : 2 A + D FH 0 K 0 I A 5 G 3 H 0 A V D ID M H I A N N IS A T S R O AT U I D V H E A A , F B F E A N IR G S A , L URU-560 001.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KARNATAKA STATE, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590 002.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 15/09/2022, VIDE NO.¸ÀASÉå:¹§âA¢/¹f/16/2009-10, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE APPOINTMENT TO THE APPLICANT ON COMPENSATORY GROUNDS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has called in question the endorsement dated 15.09.2022 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Belagavi District, whereby the petitioner's request for appointment on compassionate grounds came to be rejected, and seeking a consequential direction to provide such appointment.

2. The petitioner claims to be the adopted son of late Vittal Bhimappa Hosamani, who was working as an Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Karnataka Police Department and died in harness on 20.09.2009. The petitioner relies upon the registered adoption deed dated 09.02.1995. After the death of the employee, the petitioner submitted applications in 2009 and 2010, seeking compassionate appointment, which were rejected by an endorsement dated

16.07.2011.

3. The said rejection was challenged before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’ for short) in Application No.7167/2011, which came to be dismissed by order dated 05.08.2018.

4. Subsequently, on basis of an amendment dated

09.04.2021 to Rule 3 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1966 (‘Rules’ for short), and a later decision of this Court, recognizing the claim of an adopted son, the petitioner submitted a fresh application on 18.07.2022, the said application was rejected by the impugned endorsement dated 15.09.2022, leading to the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned endorsement is arbitrary and illegal as it fails to consider the 2021 amendment to the Rules. An adopted son is deemed to be a son for all purposes under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and therefore cannot be excluded from consideration for compassionate appointment.

6. It is submitted that respondent-authorities have ignored the judgment of this Court in the case of Girish son of Vinayak Kmuttatti Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, W.A.No.100362/2022 D.D 04.11.2022 (Girish), wherein this Court directed that the claim for compassionate appointment of an adopted son be considered on par with that of a natural-born son, without drawing any distinction between an adopted son and a natural son. The denial of compassionate appointment violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the petitioner is unemployed