Shafi D. Pendari vs Director on 4 September, 2012

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shafi D. Pendari vs Director on 4 September, 2012

Bench: Huluvadi G Ramesh

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

             CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

           Dated this the 4th day of September, 2012

                            Before

 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH

         Writ Petition     66264 / 2012      (S Res )

Between:

Shafi D Pendari, 40 yrs
Technical Organizer/Operator
R/o Ramadurga Taluk, Belgaum                   Petitioner
(By Sri Rajashekar Burji, Adv.)

And:

1      Director
       National Rural Employment Guarantee
       Scheme (NREGS), Dept. of Rural Development
       & Panchayat Raj, M S Building, Bangalore

2      Chief Executive Officer
       Zilla Panchayat, Belgaum

3      Executive Oifficer, Taluk Panchayat
       Ramadurga Taluk, Belgaum                Respondents

(By Ms Megha C Kolekar, Adv. for R1)


       The Petition is filed under Art. 226/227 of the
Constitution praying to quash the order dated 2.5.2012 -
annexure A by the 3rd respondent.
                                                               2




      The Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day,
the Court made the following:

                               ORDER

Petitioner is before this Court seeking for quashing the order dated 2.5.2012 - annexure A by the 3rd respondent and for a direction to the respondent to consider his representation at annexure D. Petitioner was appointed through outsourcing agency viz., Better Education & Social Training Society which has entered into contract with the 2nd respondent for outsourcing some technical hands. In the process, it appears petitioner has been entrusted with the work of technical operator under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme from 1.7.2007. By the order at annexure A, claiming that his service has been terminated without any inquiry and notice, petitioner is before this Court.

Heard the counsel representing the parties. 3 At the outset, the appointment of the petitioner itself is through outsourcing agency which has undertaken to extend service on contract basis. As such, the condition of employer and employee relationship between the Zilla Parishad and the petitioner does not arise. As such, petition cannot be entertained. The relief, if any, for the petitioner is against the Trust which has appointed him.

Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

Judge An

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court