Karnataka High Court
P S Shoba vs State Of Karnataka on 20 July, 2012
Author: Subhash B.Adi
Bench: Subhash B Adi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF JULY 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBHASH B ADI
WRIT PETITION NOS.23849 TO 23851 OF 2012
C/W WP NOS.16301 TO 16302/2012,
17303 TO 17304/2012 AND 24079 TO 24080/2012 (S-REG)
WP Nos.23849-23851/2012
BETWEEN:
1. P S SHOBA
W/O PALAKSHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT MARODAYER PALYA,
CHANCHANAKUPEE POST,
JAVAREKERE HOBLI,
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
2. SHARADAMMA S
D/O SHANKARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
RA/T NO.82, BETTANAPALYA VILLAGE,
RAMOHALLI POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK-60
3. RAMANJINAPPA
S/O VENKATAHANUMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
R/AT MALIGONDANAHALLI,
RAMOHALLI POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE SOUTH-60 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. T A KARUMBAIAH, ADV.)
2
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
RURAL DEVELOPMENT,
PANCHAYATHRAJ DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BANGALORE.
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT
ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
BANGALORE.
REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYATH,
BANGALORE SOUTH
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATHRI, HCGP)
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing R1 to R3 to continue the
service of petitioners in R3 Panchayath as they were
rendering their service till the completion of the scheme and
etc.
WP Nos.16301-16302/2012
BETWEEN:
1. S. CHIKKANNA S/O SOOLADEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT BIKTTANAKURKE
DEVANAPURA POST,
KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK & DISTRICT
2. P.N. DINESH KUMAR
S/O D.P. NARASIMHA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT PANDITHANA HALLI,
HEEREHALLI POST,
3
URDIGERE HOBLI,
TUMKUR TALUK & DISTRICT ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. T A KARUMBAIAH, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
RURAL DEPARTMENT &
PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPT,
M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BANGALORE - 01
REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY
2. THE ZILLA PANCHAYATH
TUMKUR DISTRICT
TUMKUR
BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYATH, TUMKUR
TUMKUR DISTRICT
4. THE URDIGERE GRAMAPANCHAYATH
URDIGERE, TUMKUR TALUK & DISTRICT
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY ...RESPONDENTS
(SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATHRI, HCGP FOR R1
R2 TO R4 - SERVED)
---
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing R1 and R2 to continue the
service of petitioner No.1 as BRC in R3 Taluk Panchayath and
service of petitioner No.2 as CRC in R4 Panchayath till the
completion of the scheme and etc.
WP Nos.17303-17304/2012
BETWEEN:
1. RANGANATH D
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
4
S/O DASAPPA, KUNDUR VILLAGE
BEERASANDRA POST
KIBBANAHALLI HOBLI
TIPTUR TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT
2. ANJANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA
R/AT HOSABYROHALLI
SULIKERE POST, KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. T A KARUMBAIAH, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
RURAL DEVELOPMENT & PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPT
M S BUILDING
DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD
BANGALORE-1
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
2. THE ZILLA PANCHAYATH
TUMKUR DISTRICT
TUMKUR
BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYATH
TUMKUR
TUMKUR DISTRICT
4. THE TAHSILDAR
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
(DELETED V/O DT.13.7.12) ...RESPONDENTS
(SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATHRI, HCGP FOR R1
R2 AND R3 - SERVED
R4 AND R5 - DELETED V/O DT.13.7.12)
---
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing R1 & R2 to continue the
5
service of petitioner No.1 as BRC in R3 Panchayath and
petitioner No.2 as BRC in R4 Panchayath till the completion of
the scheme and etc.
WP Nos.24079-24080/2012
BETWEEN:
1. LINGARAJU B
S/O B BASAVA
AGE: 30 YEARS
R/AT SIDDAIAHANAPURA
KOLLEGAL TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT
2. MAHESH S
S/O LATE SIDDARAJU
AGED 30 YEARS
MADHUVANAHALLI
KOLLEGAL TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. T A KARUMBAIAH, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT
MS BUILDING,
DR B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BANGALORE 01
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
2. CHAMARAJANAGAR ZILLA PANCHAYATH
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
CHAMARAJANAGAR
REP BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
KOLLEGAL TALUK PANCHAYATH
KOLLEGAL
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATHRI, HCGP)
---
6
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the
nature of mandamus directing respondents to continue the
service of 1st petitioner as BRC in R3 Panchayath and 2nd
petitioner as CRC of Hanur Hobli in Kollegal Taluk till the
completion of the scheme and etc.
These Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B'
Group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER
In all these writ petitions, the petitioners claim that, in pursuance of the notification dated 4.4.2011, the 1st respondent invited applications from the regional candidates for the post of co-ordinators to work in the Block Resource Centres / Cluster Resource Centres for National Rural Drinking Water Program. The petitioners were appointed by the 3rd and 4th respondents. However, the 1st respondent - State has passed an order directing the Zilla Panchyat to discontinue the services of these petitioners and to extract the work from the staff of Panchayat office. In pursuance of the same, the petitioners apprehended that their services would be discontinued.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, though these petitioners were appointed temporarily, but 7 their appointment is for a particular scheme which is yet to be completed. Further, even according to the Government as per Annexure-E there is no bar to continue the services of these petitioners in case of need and in this regard, he relied on Annexure-F produced in WP Nos.16301-02/2012, wherein the Chief Executive Officer of Taluk Panchayat has informed that the services of these petitioners are essential to complete the scheme. In view of the same, there was no need for the Government to issue a direction to discontinue the services of these petitioners.
3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submitted that, there is financial burden on the State as the State has to supply funds for the scheme. There are already sufficient staff working in the Taluk Panchayat and Grama Panchayat whose services could be utilised for the purpose and hence, the Government has taken policy decision to discontinue the services of these petitioners. Further, the petitioners have no legal right to seek continuity of services as their appointment is purely temporary in nature and only under a particular scheme.
8
4. No doubt, the post held by the petitioners was under
a particular scheme and is purely temporary in nature, however, they were appointed in the scheme called National Rural Drinking Water Program and that scheme is yet to be completed. Apart from this, the Taluk Panchayat has also expressed that the services of these petitioners are essential. There is also no bar under Annexure-E dated 23.4.2012 wherein it is stated that in case there is any need, the Panchayat can continue the services of these petitioners on contract basis.
5. Having regard to these circumstances, even if the petitioners have no right to seek regularisation of services, nevertheless, the Taluk Panchayat has informed the Zilla Panchayat as to the need of continuing the services of these petitioners. Respondent No.2 - Zilla Panchyat may consider as to whether the services of these petitioners is required to be continued and if there is requirement, the respondents shall continue their services atleast till the completion of the scheme. Further, if the petitioners are already working and if 9 there is need of their services, they need not be discontinued till the completion of the scheme.
With these observations, petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE RV