Compassionate appointment can be made in any aided PU college across State: Karnataka High Court

The High Court of Karnataka has said that application for compassionate appointment in an aided pre-university college cannot be rejected straight away merely for the reason that there is no vacancy in the college where the deceased employee was working prior to the death, when the rules clearly allow appointment on compassionate grounds anywhere in the State based on circumstances.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order while setting aside an endorsement issued by the Deputy Director, School Education Department in September 2024 rejecting an application filed by petitioner, Yamanappa Wadakar of Bagalkot for appointment on compassionate grounds after the death of his father, who was working as a First Grade Assistant Adarsh Composite PU College, Bagalkot.

Petitioner’s application was rejected merely on the ground that no vacancy was available in the college where petitioner’s father was employed.

What rules say

On perusing the provisions of the Karnataka Pre-University Education (Academic, Registration, Administration, Grant-in-aid etc.) (Amendment) Rules, 2010, the court noted that the rules very specifically makes provisions for appointment on compassionate grounds when there is no vacancy in the aided college in which deceased employee was working.

The rules, the court pointed out that, clearly states that the deputy director for PU education should finding out vacancy available in other aided PU colleges in the same district when no vacancy is available in the college where the deceased employee was working.

Further, the court noted that the rules has also provision for considering the persons eligible for compassionate appointment in an aided PU colleges situated anywhere across the State when no vacancy available both the college in which deceased employee worked and in any other aided colleges situated within that district.

Duty-bound to act

Stating the rejection of petitioner’s application is in clear contravention of the mandate under the Rules, 2010, the court said that the authorities concerned are duty-bound to act in strict conformity with the rules while considering the petitioner’s legitimate claim for compassionate appointment.