Karnataka High Court

WP/3756/2026 of PREETISH K S Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 25 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

CNR: KAHC010087482026 NC: 2026:KHC:53364 WP No. 3756 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3756 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN: PREETISH K S, S/O LATE K. SOMASHEKARAPPA, AGED

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION NO. 3756 OF 2026 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

PREETISH K S,

S/O LATE K. SOMASHEKARAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,

R/AT- NO.32, “SOMASHEKAR”, 1ST MAIN,

RELIABLE LAYOUT NEAR SRI. SAI LAYOUT,

PUTTASWAMAYYANAPALYA SATYAMANGALA

MAIN ROAD, SIRA GATE, TUMAKURU-572106.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. NATARAJ G, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,

M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001,

REPTD. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

2.

THE DIRECTOR,

PRE-UNIVERSITY BOARD,

SAMPIGE ROAD, 18TH CROSS,

MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560003.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 TO

CONSIDER THE CASE OF PETITIONER FOR COMPASSIONATE

GROUND

APPOINTMENT

BY

CONSIDERING

THE

REPRESENTATIONS DATED 22.09.2025 AND 28.11.2025 VIDE

ANNEXURES-H AND J.

Digitally

signed by

PADMAVATHI

B K

Location: High

Court of

Karnataka

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS

UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before the Court seeking the following prayers: “a) Issue Writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the respondent No.1 to consider the case of petitioner for compassionate ground appointment by considering the representation dated 22.09.2025 and 28.11.2025 vide Annexure-H and J in the interest of justice and equity.

b) And to pass such other order or directions as deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice.”

2. Heard Sri.Nataraj G, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Rashmi Rao, learned HCGP appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record.

3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

3.1. The father of the petitioner was working as Kannada lecturer in Ranganatha Pre-University College, Sira, Tumakuru district, dies in harness on 13.10.2017. Pursuant to the death

HC-KAR

of the sole bread winner of the family, the petitioner-the son submits an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds on 04.06.2018. The respondent No.2 in terms of the correspondence dated 10.07.2018, directed the mother to file an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. In the light of the mother’s entitlement being over and above the petitioner, the mother then submits an application. For about 5 to 7 years, nothing has happened and therefore, on 22.09.2025, a representation is made to respondent No.2 to consider the request of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. That having gone unheeded, petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition seeking a direction for consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of the representation so submitted.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would reiterate the contents of both the representations dated 22.09.2025 and 28.11.2025 and would seek this Court to issue

HC-KAR

a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds.

5. Learned HCGP would, however, refute the submission contending that compassionate appointment is not a matter of right but if the representations are not considered, they would merit consideration within the time frame that this Court would fix.

6. In the light of the said submission and the contra submission, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. As the application is given seven years ago to the hands of respondent No.2 which has not met its consideration and in the case of compassionate appointment, it is the Circulars issued by the State itself that those applications should merit consideration within one year from the date of its submission. Seven years have passed by. Therefore, the State shall consider the representation(s) within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law, bearing in mind

HC-KAR

the law that is now prevalent with regard to grant of compassionate appointment.

Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

CBC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead