In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, quashed the rejection of a compassionate appointment application filed by Santosh Yamanappa Wadakar. The court held that the rejection, based solely on the absence of a vacancy in the institution where his father worked, violated the Karnataka Pre-University Education (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) (Amendment) Rules, 2010. Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the Deputy Director of Pre-University Education to reconsider the case and identify vacancies as per the statutory framework.

Read in Hindi

Background of the Case

Santosh Yamanappa Wadakar’s father served as a First Grade Assistant at Adarsh Composite Pre-University College, Bevoor, Bagalkot District, an aided institution. After his demise in 2009, Santosh applied for compassionate appointment under the 2010 Rules. The application was rejected by the Deputy Director of Pre-University Education, citing no vacancies in the deceased’s institution. The rejection was later endorsed by the Joint Director.

Santosh’s counsel argued that the 2010 Rules mandate a broader consideration of vacancies. Specifically:

"The Deputy Director must first consider vacancies in the deceased’s institution. If none exist, vacancies in any aided private pre-university college within the district must be explored. Failing this, the Director must identify vacancies anywhere in the state."

Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Punjab Jail Official's Conspiracy Case

The rejection, limited to the original institution, ignored this hierarchical process, rendering it unlawful.

Justice Govindaraj emphasized the clear language of Clause 1(a) and (b) of the 2010 Rules:

1. Institution-Level Vacancy: Priority is given to the deceased’s institution.
2. District-Level Vacancy: If none, the Deputy Director must identify vacancies in other aided institutions within the district.
3. State-Level Vacancy: Absent district vacancies, the Director must allocate a position anywhere in Karnataka.

The court found the respondents’ actions contrary to this framework. The rejection disregarded the statutory obligation to explore vacancies beyond the original institution.

Key Observations

• The 2010 Rules aim to mitigate financial hardship for dependents of deceased employees.
• Authorities must adhere to the sequential vacancy-check process.
• The petitioner’s legitimate claim was unjustly denied due to a narrow interpretation of the Rules.

Read also:- High Court Sets Aside Tribunal Order on Doctor’s Transfer, Upholds Administrative Exigency

Court’s Directive

1. The impugned endorsement dated 20.09.2024 was quashed.
2. The Deputy Director (Respondent No. 4) must reconsider the application, identifying vacancies within Bagalkot District.
3. If no district vacancies exist, the Director must allocate a state-level vacancy.
4. The process must be completed within eight weeks.

Case Title: Santosh Yamanappa Wadakar v. The State of Karnataka & Others

Case Number: Writ Petition No. 103894 of 2025 (S-RES)