INDUMATI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE 1 REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) THE petitioner claims that her husband who was working as a Gangman with the respondent at Chintamani Town had met with an accident whereby he was electrocuted, as on 29.6.2005. The petitioner has two children by her deceased husband and they were aged 8 and 5 and also her father -in -law and mother -in -law, who are aged and all of them are left without any source of livelihood on account of the death of her husband and therefore, had approached the respondent seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. In the very first instance the respondent had issued a reply at Annexure -"D" that she would be provided appointment on compassionate grounds within one month from 29.6.2003. However, there was no further action taken in providing such employment and over the years, the petitioner has struggled to keep herself and her family alive with the fond hope that the respondents would provide her employment. However, the respondents have resiled from the promise held out as per Annexure -"D" and paid a paltry turn of Rs.1,80,000/ - as compensation, which the petitioner has refused to receive since she would need employment to sustain her family and not monetary compensation. It is in that background the petitioner is before this Court in view of the respondents having failed to provide such employment even after having promised to do so.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would however insist count that the petitioner having lost her husband in an accident while he was the employee of the respondents, the respondents are bound to compensate the petitioner by providing employment, which cannot be denied. Though it is not a matter of right, circumstances are present whereby such employment is warranted as several lives are at stake. Therefore would plead that there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for provision of such employment.