Karnataka High Court Ruling Eases Age Restrictions for Compassionate Appointments

The Karnataka High Court has delivered a landmark ruling that allows widows to apply for compassionate appointments without being restricted by age limits. This decision aims to provide immediate financial relief to families who have lost their primary earners. The court emphasized that humanitarian considerations should take precedence over rigid administrative rules, ensuring that those in genuine financial distress receive the support they need. This ruling not only benefits the individual case of Sarojamma but also sets a precedent for many families facing similar challenges, reinforcing the importance of empathy in employment policies.

By Ambika Singh Nov 14, 2025, 19:39 IST

Significant Ruling by Karnataka High Court

A pivotal decision from the Karnataka High Court has provided much-needed relief to families grappling with the loss of their primary income earner. The court has determined that a widow should not be denied a compassionate appointment solely based on exceeding the age limit. The ruling emphasizes that humanitarian factors and the financial struggles of the family should take precedence over strict administrative guidelines.

Importance of the Judgment

Compassionate appointments are intended to assist families who unexpectedly lose their breadwinner. Typically, the spouse, often the wife, is considered for such roles to ensure the family's financial stability. However, many applications face rejection due to age restrictions, adding to the distress of grieving families.

This recent ruling highlights that age should not be a barrier when the goal of compassionate appointments is to provide immediate support.

Case Background

Sarojamma, a 47-year-old widow, encountered financial difficulties following the death of her husband, Kondayi, who had been employed with KSRTC since 2006. He passed away on duty on September 27, 2023, leaving the family without any income.

To support her family, Sarojamma applied for a compassionate appointment under KSRTC’s policy. However, her application was denied on January 17, 2025, due to her age exceeding the upper limit of 43 years.

Court's Rationale for Favoring Sarojamma

The High Court underscored that the primary aim of compassionate appointments is to provide immediate financial assistance to grieving families. Rigidly applying age limits without considering individual circumstances undermines the policy's intent.

The court referenced a Supreme Court ruling in Canara Bank vs. Ajithkumar (2025), which emphasized that authorities should assess the family's financial hardship rather than deny assistance based solely on age.

Court's Directive

The Karnataka High Court annulled KSRTC's rejection of Sarojamma's application and instructed the corporation to reassess her case within eight weeks. The court urged KSRTC to consider how the age limit could be adjusted in light of the unique circumstances surrounding her situation.

This judgment reinforces that compassionate appointment schemes are designed to alleviate human suffering, not exacerbate it, and that strict adherence to age limits should not overshadow the scheme's purpose.

A Landmark Decision for Families

This ruling is a significant victory not only for Sarojamma but also for numerous families facing similar challenges. For many dependents of government employees, obtaining a job after the loss of a loved one is crucial for survival. Unfortunately, age restrictions often hinder their access to necessary support.

The High Court's decision emphasizes that compassionate appointments should be driven by empathy, fairness, and real-life challenges rather than bureaucratic rigidity.

Setting a Precedent

It recognizes real-life hardships over bureaucratic constraints.

It aligns compassionate appointment policies with their intended purpose.

It reinforces the need for flexibility in welfare-oriented schemes.

It offers hope to those denied jobs due to age limits amid financial crises.

This ruling serves as a beacon of hope for families who unexpectedly lose their income provider, reaffirming the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that compassion and humanity remain central to employment policies aimed at supporting distressed families.