In WRIT APPEAL No.100362 of 2022 (GM-RES)-KAR HC- Application made by adopted son for compassionate appointment is required to be considered, holds Karnataka HC
Justices Suraj Govindaraj & G Basavaraja [04-11-2022]

Read Order:GIRISH S/O VINAYAK KMUTTATTI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS 

LE Correspondent

Dharwad, November 22, 2022:The Dharwad Bench of the Karnataka High Court has granted the relief of compassionate appointment to the adopted son of a Government employee while observing that it was the adopted son who was so adopted by the deceased to take care of the family on account of the death of a natural-born son.

“A son is a son or a daughter is a daughter, adopted or otherwise, if such a distinction is accepted then there would be no purpose served by adoption”, the Division Bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj and Justice G Basavaraja said.

In this matter, the petitioner is the adopted son of one Vinayak M Muttatti, who was working as Class-IV employee (dalayat) in the office of Assistant Public Prosecutor, JMFC, Banahatti. The appellant was adopted by way of an adoption deed and the adoption was made on account of the natural born son of the said Vinayak M Muttatti having expired in a road traffic accident.

When the  adoptive father expired, the appellant submitted a representation seeking for compassionate appointment. The said representation was rejected by the second respondent on the ground that the appellant was an adopted son and the Karnataka Civil Service (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 did not provide for consideration of adopted son for compassionate appointment. The appellant’s Writ Petition was dismissed  and so, the appellant approached the Division Bench of the High Court.

The short question which was raised apart from the amendment made to the Rules, 1996 was whether adopted son would have to be treated equally to that of a natural son while considering an application for compassionate appointment.

The Bench noted that the aspect of ground of compassionate appointment arises only on account of any financial difficulty and or stringency faced by the family on account of the death of the earning family member who was employed in the Government service. It was in that background that an effort was made to provide compassionate appointment to one of the family members so as to enable that family member to take care of the entire family, the Bench added.

The High Court took into account the fact that the official Respondents sought to make a distinction between an adopted son and a natural son so as to deprive the adopted son of compassionate appointment. 

The Bench clarified that the daughter being a natural daughter, would have been entitled to a compassionate appointment if not for her being mentally retarded as also physically handicapped. 

Considering that the adopted son who was so adopted by the deceased to take care of the family on account of the death of a natural-born son who has applied for a compassionate appointment, the Bench held, “In the above circumstances, we are therefore of the considered opinion that the application made by the adopted son for compassionate appointment is bonafide and is required to be considered in the background of the difficulties faced by the family”.

As per the Bench, the distinction made between the adopted son and a natural son by the official respondents either on the basis of the existing Rules would not have any impact or role to play in the matter. 

Thus, allowing the appeal, the Bench directed the Respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner for compassionate appointment as if the petitioner is a natural born son without making distinction between an adopted son and a natural son.