P C SREERAM Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition has sought for striking down the rule 3 (3) of the Rules called the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 on the ground that it is arbitrary. Rule 3 (1), (2) and (3) of the Rules reads as follows:

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he is an adopted son of a deceased government servant and therefore he is to be treated on par with the natural son for the purpose of considering his application for an appointment on compassionate grounds. Annexure-B is the application filed by the petitioner seeking for an appointment on compassionate ground. In the said application, the petitioner has described himself as a 'rafcsandrt' (Sakumaga ). ';ro*> sandrt' (Sakumaga) cannot be treated as an adopted son. Along with the said application, the petitioner has also produced,a Will executed by the deceased Government servant bequeathing her property to the petitioner. In this Will, the petitioner has not been described as an adopted son. If that is so, even if an adopted son is excluded under the rule, the petitioner since he is not an adopted son, cannot have any grievance so far as the impugned rules are concerned.

(3.) IT is the further case of the petitioner that the authorities were not right in applying new rules so as to reject his application for appointment on compassionate grounds since the rules which were in force as on the date of the application should have been applied. No doubt the rules came into force from the 1996 whereas the petitioner's application for appointment on compassionate grounds is in the year 1994. Since the petitioner cannot be considered as an adopted son, it is immaterial whether the old rules or new rules are applicable. Therefore, there is no substance even in this contention also.