DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION Vs. H N GURUPRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the order dated 14. 6. 2006 made in Writ Petition No. 32634 of 2003 at the instance of the state.

(2.) THE admitted facts of the case are that the respondent writ petitioner in Writ Petition No. 32634 of 2003 when he was 19 years old and studying second year B. Com. , his father who was working as a Junior Health inspector died in harness. Hence he applied for compassionate appointment and that apart the respondent-writ petitioner was also a physically challenged person. Despite he applied on 13. 6. 1990 for the post of Second division Assistant, the respondents had not considered his application immediately thereafter. In the meanwhile, he completed his degree and graduated in April 1992 and became qualified for the post of First Division assistant. But on 21. 7. 1992 the respondent without taking into consideration the degree qualification appointed him only as a Second division Assistant, which necessitated the writ petitioner of course after joining duty in the post of Second Division Assistant to make further representation to consider him for the post of First Division Assistant. He also made a representation on 2. 7. 1992, but the respondents rejected the said representation. A further representation on 7. 12. 2001 was made requesting the respondents for appointing him as the First Division assistant and as no orders were passed, Writ Petition No. 32634 of 2003 was filed seeking for a writ of mandamus to consider his representation to appoint him in the post of First Division Assistant. In fact, the Commissioner of the City Municipal Corporation also by proceedings dated 9. 7. 1992 recommended the petitioner to the post of First Division Assistant. Taking all these facts into consideration, the learned Single Judge by order dated 14. 6. 2006 directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as a First Division Assistant in the available vacancy within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. Hence aggrieved by the said order, the State has filed the present writ appeal.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned Government Advocate, as per Rule 6 (4)once an appointment is made under the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996, it shall be final and no fresh appointment to a different post or a higher post under these rules shall be permissible.