<p>Bengaluru: The High Court dismissed the petition by an adopted son of a driver of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. A division bench comprising Justices DK Singh and Rajesh Rai K observed that the application was filed belatedly, five years after the death of the employee.</p><p>The petitioner Vinayaka Madenahalli, a resident of Hirekerur, Haveri district, had first submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds on February 13, 2019. </p>.From Sid Sriram to Samay Raina, block your calendars for these iconic November events in Bengaluru.<p>The petitioner claimed that he was the adopted son of Chandrappa Madenahalli, driver with the KSRTC, who died in harness on February 22, 2014. The petitioner contended that after his application was rejected on May 8, 2019, he filed two more representations in August 2021. He moved the high court and on July 10, 2024, a single bench dismissed his petition.</p>.<p>The advocate representing the KSRTC submitted that the corporation had informed the bereaved family that any of the family members could seek appointment on compassionate ground. It was submitted that the corporation’s policy specifically prohibits appointment on compassionate ground to the adopted son or daughter.</p><p>It was informed to the division bench that the petitioner had filed a suit before a court in Hirekerur in 2018 seeking declaration that he was the adopted son of Chandrappa Madenahalli. The counsel for the corporation argued that the suit was decreed as uncontested and said it was filed only to get a declaration to use it up to the government post. The policy of the corporation itself provides for making an application for compassionate appointment within a period of one year from the date of the death of the bread earner employee, the advocate submitted.</p><p>The division bench noted that the first application was made by the petitioner after the expiry of five years from the date of death. “Considering the policy of the respondent-Corporation, wherein it is provided that an adopted son or daughter would not be entitled to compassionate appointment, as well as considering the fact that the first application, as per averments in the writ petition as well as in the memorandum of appeal, was filed only on February 13, 2019, which is after five years from the date of death of the employee, we are of the view that the application filed by the appellant was also belatedly filed and such an application could not have been entertained by the Corporation. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Canara Bank (supra), we find no merit in this appeal, which is why it is dismissed,” the bench said.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The High Court dismissed the petition by an adopted son of a driver of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. A division bench comprising Justices DK Singh and Rajesh Rai K observed that the application was filed belatedly, five years after the death of the employee.</p><p>The petitioner Vinayaka Madenahalli, a resident of Hirekerur, Haveri district, had first submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds on February 13, 2019. </p>.From Sid Sriram to Samay Raina, block your calendars for these iconic November events in Bengaluru.<p>The petitioner claimed that he was the adopted son of Chandrappa Madenahalli, driver with the KSRTC, who died in harness on February 22, 2014. The petitioner contended that after his application was rejected on May 8, 2019, he filed two more representations in August 2021. He moved the high court and on July 10, 2024, a single bench dismissed his petition.</p>.<p>The advocate representing the KSRTC submitted that the corporation had informed the bereaved family that any of the family members could seek appointment on compassionate ground. It was submitted that the corporation’s policy specifically prohibits appointment on compassionate ground to the adopted son or daughter.</p><p>It was informed to the division bench that the petitioner had filed a suit before a court in Hirekerur in 2018 seeking declaration that he was the adopted son of Chandrappa Madenahalli. The counsel for the corporation argued that the suit was decreed as uncontested and said it was filed only to get a declaration to use it up to the government post. The policy of the corporation itself provides for making an application for compassionate appointment within a period of one year from the date of the death of the bread earner employee, the advocate submitted.</p><p>The division bench noted that the first application was made by the petitioner after the expiry of five years from the date of death. “Considering the policy of the respondent-Corporation, wherein it is provided that an adopted son or daughter would not be entitled to compassionate appointment, as well as considering the fact that the first application, as per averments in the writ petition as well as in the memorandum of appeal, was filed only on February 13, 2019, which is after five years from the date of death of the employee, we are of the view that the application filed by the appellant was also belatedly filed and such an application could not have been entertained by the Corporation. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Canara Bank (supra), we find no merit in this appeal, which is why it is dismissed,” the bench said.</p>