Jinalben Murlidhar Shastri vs Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Limited on 1 May, 2024
9. Similar is the view taken in case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V.
Puranik (supra).
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 34 (0.98 seconds)The Director vs Smt R Ambika on 23 February, 2022
It was submitted that reliance was
placed upon decision in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V
Puranik (supra) would not be appropriate, as said decision was
rendered after considering challenge to Rules applicable to
8
government servants and not the Regulations applicable to
KPTCL. It was also submitted that challenge to validity of
Regulations was not pressed and not decided by learned Single
Judge. Therefore, direction issued would be unsustainable in law.
Kavita Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 September, 2022
From the above, it would be seen that Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while dismissing the Special Leave to Appeal made
observations giving its full imprimatur to the reasoning of the High
Court in the case of C.N. Apporva Shree (supra) and noticed that
the denial of job on compassionate basis to a married daughter
while giving such indulgence to a married son has been quashed
in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V. Puranik (supra).
Smt. Heena Sheikh vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 September, 2022
From the above, it would be seen that Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while dismissing the Special Leave to Appeal made
observations giving its full imprimatur to the reasoning of the High
Court in the case of C.N. Apporva Shree (supra) and noticed that
the denial of job on compassionate basis to a married daughter
while giving such indulgence to a married son has been quashed
in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V. Puranik (supra).
Priyanka Shrimali vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 September, 2022
From the above, it would be seen that Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while dismissing the Special Leave to Appeal made
observations giving its full imprimatur to the reasoning of the High
Court in the case of C.N. Apporva Shree (supra) and noticed that
the denial of job on compassionate basis to a married daughter
while giving such indulgence to a married son has been quashed
in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V. Puranik (supra).
Savita Khatik vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 September, 2022
From the above, it would be seen that Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while dismissing the Special Leave to Appeal made
observations giving its full imprimatur to the reasoning of the High
Court in the case of C.N. Apporva Shree (supra) and noticed that
the denial of job on compassionate basis to a married daughter
while giving such indulgence to a married son has been quashed
in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V. Puranik (supra).
The State Of Karnataka vs Smt Arpitha on 15 February, 2023
applicant probabilising her case of being entitled for an
appointment on compassionate ground. It would have
been a more meaningful exercise if the Tribunal had called
upon the applicant/respondent herein to probabilise her
claim. But we find that the Tribunal has deemed it fit to
direct reconsideration only on the short ground of the
endorsement being contrary to Bhuvaneshwari V
Puranik's case. As noted at the very beginning of this
order, the objective of compassionate appointment has
been and will always be based on two factors i.e.
dependency and economic and financial status of the
dependents. Had the Tribunal called upon the applicant to
place a prima facie material, it would have been justified
in issuing the direction. Mandamuses/directions cannot be
issued at the mere asking. Unless and until the
petitioner/party makes out a prima facie and legally
enforceable right, writ in the form of a mandamus or in
the nature of a mandamus could be rendered futile
otherwise. The Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with the said
issue in the following cases :
Smt.K.S. Apoorva vs State Of Karnataka on 28 October, 2024
2.1. The vehement submission of learned counsel
appearing for petitioner that a learned Single Judge of this
Court in BHUNESHWARA V PURANIK v. STATE OF
KARNATAKA1, has struck down the word 'unmarried'
occurring in the definition of 'dependents' and later, the
1
(2020) SCC OnLine Kar 3397
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:43307-DB
WP No. 21159 of 2023
subject Rules have been amended even to include 'married
daughters' within the definition, would not come to the aid
of petitioner. Firstly, where a piece of delegated legislation
is struck down on any ground other than legislative
competence, ordinarily, the decision would operate
prospectively. Added, even the amendment to the subject
Rules effected in the year 2021 was pursuant to the said
decision of the learned Single Judge and apparently, it is
prospective in operation, in the absence of a contra intent
being demonstrated.
Priyanka Shrimali vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 January, 2022
In an appeal filed
by the State of Karnataka against another judgment in the case of
The State of Karnataka and others vs. C.N. Apporva Shree
and another [Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)
No(s).20166/2021, decided on 17.12.2021] the Supreme
Court while dismissing the appeal has specifically approved the
view of the Court in the case of Smt. Bhuvaneshwari V. Puranik
(supra) in the following terms:
Mani Machha vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opp. ... on 3 February, 2026
6.6. It is relevant to mention what M. Nagaprasanna, J, in
Bhuvaneshwari V Puranik v. State of Karnataka9 observed: