1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 23^rd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

WRIT PETITION Nos.107742-107743/2018 (S-RES)

BETWEEN

MAHADEVI W/O TIRAKAPPA BELUR

AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLDWORK,

R/O: MANAGUNDI,

TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

...PETITIONER

(BY SMT. SUMANGALA A. CHAKALABBI, ADVOCATE)

A N D

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BENGALURU-1.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-1.

3. THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-1.

4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-1.

5. THE TAHASILDAR,

DHARWAD TALUQ, DHARWAD.

6. THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT

MANAGUNDI VILLAGE,

2

TA & DISTRICT; DHARWAD.

DHARWAD.

7. BASAVARAJ S/O BASAVANEPPA BELUR

AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: GRAM SAHAYAK,

R/O: MANAGUNDI,

TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

8. S.Y. PATGUNDHI

AGE ABOUT 62 YEARS,

OCC: RETIRED TAHASILDAR,

R/O: BHARATI NAGAR,

TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

9. K KESHAVARAO

AGE: NOT KNOWN,

OCC: VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT,

R/O: VANASHRINAGAR,

SATTUR, DHARWAD.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI. VINAYAK S.KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 TO R6

SHRI. V.G. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R7)

(NOTICE TO R8 & R9 DISPENSED WITH)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

ORDER DATED 13.08.2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 IN

NO.WATAN/W.B.N/VAHI-49/2017-18,

MARKED

AS

ANNEXURE-A

WHEREBY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER

PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5; QUASH THE ORDER BEARING

NO.WATN/GRASA:VAHI:2003-04

DATED:01.06.2003,

MARKED

AS

ANNEXURE-B, WHEREBY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 HAS APPOINTED THE

RESPONDENT NO.7 ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND TO THE POST OF

GRAMA SAHAYAK OF MANAGUNDI VILLAGE IN THE PLACE OF THE

DECEASED HUSBAND OF THE PETITIONER; AND DIRECT THE

RESPONDENT NO.5 TO APPOINT THE PETITIONER AS GRAM SAHAYAK

(VILLAGE

ASSISTANT)

ON

COMPASSIONATE

GROUND

W.E.F.

01.06.203 IN THE PLACE OF HER DECEASED HUSBAND.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

3

ORDER

The petitioner’s husband was appointed as Gram Sahayak

on 22.04.1997, and on 05.03.2003, he died leaving behind his

wife, the petitioner as his Class-I legal heir. Respondent No.7

claiming to be cousin of the deceased husband of the petitioner

filed an application on 10.04.2003 seeking compassionate

appointment as Gram Sahayak in place of deceased husband of

the petitioner. The petitioner also filed an application on

19.04.2003 seeking appointment on compassionate ground.

However, respondent No.5 by order 01.06.2003 appointed

respondent no.7 as Gram Sahayak on compassionate ground

stating that the petitioner has consented for appointment of

respondent No.7 as Gram Sahayak on compassionate ground.

Being aggrieved, these writ petitions are filed.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

respondent No.7 is not a Class-I legal heir of the deceased

Tirakappa so as to be eligible for being appointed on

compassionate ground. She further submits that by creating a

forged consent letter, respondent No.7 has obtained the

4

appointment on compassionate ground. Hence, she submits that

appointment of respondent No.7 be quashed and consequently

the respondent concerned may be directed to appoint the

petitioner as Gram Sahayak on compassionate ground.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent

No.7 would submit that the petitioner having given consent for

appointing respondent No.7 on compassionate ground, cannot

now turn back and submit that respondent No.7 is not entitled

for appointment on compassionate ground. He further submitted

that since time immemorial, ancestors of the husband of the

petitioner and respondent No.7 were working as Gram Sahayak

and respondent No.7