Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Sri. Mahesh M on 13 December, 2024
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 16280 OF 2021 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT
M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR
OF FORESTS (HEAD OF FOREST FORCE)
ARANYA BHAVAN
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU-560 003
Digitally signed 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
by SHAKAMBARI AND RECRUITMENT AUTHORITY
Location: HIGH CHAMARAJANAGARA CIRCLE
COURT OF
KARNATAKA CHAMARAJANAGARA-571 101
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA)
AND:
1. SRI. MAHESH M
S/O MUNIYAIAH
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/O MUKAHALLI COLONY VILLAGE
HONGALLI POST
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
GUNDLUPETE TALUK
CHAMARAJANGARA DISTRICT
2. SRI. KRISHNAIAH
S/O MAHADEVA
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
R/O MUKAHALLI COLONY VILLAGE
HONGALLI POST
GUNDLUPETE TALUK
CHAMARAJANGARA DISTRICT
3. SRI. GOPALA G
S/O GANGADHARAIAH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/O MUKAHALLI COLONY VILLAGE
HONGALLI POST
GUNDLUPETE TALUK
CHAMARAJANGARA DISTRICT
4. KUMARI. LAVANYA
D/O LOKESH B
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
R/O MADDURU COLONY VILLAGE
GUNDLUPETE TALUK
CHAMARAJANGARA DISTRICT-571 111
5. SRI. SHIVARUDRASWAMY
S/O MADEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/O KOWLIHALLI DAM
LAKKANAHALLI POST
KOLLEGAL TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 440
6. SRI. BOMMA
S/O CHIKKASOMA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/O MADDURU COLONY VILLAGE
GUNDLUPETE TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 440
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
7. SRI. PRAKASH M
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMARAJANAGARA-571 101
8. SRI. KARTHIK A.M
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
9. SRI. RAVI
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
10. SMT. JAYAPRADA
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
11. SRI. MAHADEVA
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
12. SMT. REKHA
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
13. SRI. RAJU OYILMANJIL M
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
14. SMT. VINODA S
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
15. SRI. MADHU KOILAR
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
16. SRI. LAKSHMANA
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
17. SRI. RAJESH H.R
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
18. SRI. NAGESHA N
MAJOR
C/O OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST
AND RECRUITING AUTHORITY
CHAMRAJANAGARA CIRCLE
CHAMRAJANAGARA-571 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR JOGI MATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE
A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT,
ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED
24.03.2021 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPLICATION No-
297-302 OF 2019.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB
WP No. 16280 of 2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The State-Forest Authorities are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order dated 24.03.2021 in Application Nos.297- 302/2019 passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short 'Tribunal'), wherein the petitioners are directed to select the respondents herein as per their merit as forest watchers against the posts notified for Scheduled Tribes in the Bandipur Tiger Reserve area, in accordance with law, with a further direction that the candidates who have already been selected and appointed with lesser merit than the applicants may be continued but in supernumerary posts.
2. Heard Sri. H.K.Kenchegowda, learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners and learned counsel Sri. Anil Kumar Jogimath, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 6. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021
3. This Court on 08.03.2022 passed the following interim order:
"Heard the learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
Having perused the order impugned, we are of the opinion that no prima facie case is made out which warrants interference at the interim stage. Primarily, the contention of the State is that in the application they have not specifically stated or claimed quota under the Forest Dwellers. But it is fairly admitted that residential address and Soliga caste and other details in the application are not disputed. That apart, it is seen that the rejection is after completion of viva-voce. If it is the case of the petitioners that applications are defective, rejection ought to have been made in the earlier stage itself and not after allowing them to participate.
Be that as it may. To balance equities, we deem it appropriate to make appointment of respondents/applicants subject to the final orders that may be passed in the writ petition.
Interim order is subject to the condition that orders of the Tribunal shall be complied within four weeks."-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021
4. On 28.09.2022, Sri. Anil Kumar Ratan, Additional P.C.C.F., was present before this Court and this Court recorded the statement of the said P.C.C.F that they require three months time to comply with a direction issued by the Tribunal as well as interim direction passed by this Court.
5. On 20.01.2023, learned AGA submitted before the Court that respondent Nos.1 to 6 were offered employment. Respondent Nos.2 to 6 have been appointed and respondent No.1 has declined the offer of the post of Forest Guard. Learned AGA also invites attention of this Court to the memo filed on behalf of the Government enclosing order of appointment of respondent Nos.2 to 6 and points out that the appointment order is subject to the out come of the present writ petition.
6. Learned AGA further submits that Notification dated 21.05.2018 was issued by petitioner No.3 calling applications to fill up the post of Forest Watchers at Bandipur Tiger Reserved Area and two other Tiger -9- NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021 Reserves. Out of the total 49 posts advertised to fill up, 22 posts were reserved for Forest Dwelling Tribes which included Jenukuruba, Kadukuruba, Hakkipikki, Soliga, Soligaru, Yarava, Gowdlu, Irular, Iruliga, Koraga, Melakudi, Malaikudi, Maleru, Medha and Thoda communities.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate inviting attention of this Court to the applications submitted by respondent Nos.1 to 6 submits that, the candidature of respondent Nos.1 to 6 were rejected on the ground that they have not claimed reservation under Forest Dwelling Tribes and they have not specified that they are claiming reservation under the Forest Dwelling Tribes in the applications submitted by them. As the respondent Nos.1 to 6 have not specified with regard to reservation claimed as Forest Dwelling Tribes, it would be difficult for the Recruiting Authority to implement the reservation policy of the State. Thus, learned Additional Government Advocate justifies the non-consideration of
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021 respondent Nos.1 to 6's candidature for appointment as Forest Watchers.
8. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.Anil Kumar Jogimath would submit that respondent Nos.1 to 6 belong to communities which are included in the Forest Dwelling Tribe and they have shown their address within the forest area. Further, he submits that the notification would not require the candidates to mention that they are claiming reservation under the Forest Dwelling Tribes, but they should belong to those communities mentioned in the notification. When the respondents belong to the communities included in the Forest Dwelling Tribes, non- mentioning of Forest Dwelling Tribes would not disentitle for consideration of their cases for appointment as Forest Watchers under posts meant for Forest Dwelling Tribes. Thus, learned counsel prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021
9. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, the only point which falls for our consideration is as to, "Whether the petitioners - Government Authorities have made out any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal?"
10. Answer to the above point would be in the Negative for the following reasons:
11. The notification dated 21.05.2018 of the third petitioner inviting applications to fill up the posts of Forest Watchers in Bandipur, Chamarajanagar Tiger Reserve Area and Kaveri Wildlife Division, reserved for Local Dwelling Tribes reads as follows:
"1.1. ºÀÄ° ¸ÀAgÀQëvÀ ¥ÀæzÉñÀ, §ArÃ¥ÀÄgÀ «¨sÁUÀ-20 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥Àj²µÀÖ ¥ÀAUÀqÀ (Local Dwelling Tribes) - 2 (¨ÁåPï¯ÁUï) ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÀÄ° ¸ÀAgÀQëvÀ ¥ÀæzÉñÀ, §ArÃ¥ÀÄgÀ «¨sÁUÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è §gÀĪÀ ¥ÀÆtð CxÀªÁ ¨sÁUÀ±À: vÁ®ÆPÀÄ ¥ÀæzÉñÀUÀ¼À°è 1£Éà vÀgÀUÀw¬ÄAzÀ 7£Éà vÀgÀUÀwAiÀĪÀgÉUÉ C¨sÀå¹¹gÀĪÀ
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021 ºÁUÀÆ F «¨sÁUÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ CgÀtåUÀ¼À°è ªÁ¹¸ÀĪÀ ¥Àj²µÀ× ¥ÀAUÀqÀPÉÌ ¸ÉÃjzÀ §ÄqÀPÀlÄÖ d£ÁAUÀUÀ¼ÁzÀ eÉãÀÄ PÀÄgÀħ, PÁqÀÄ PÀÄgÀħ, ºÀQ̦QÌ, ¸ÉÆðUÀ, ¸ÉÆðUÀgÀÄ, AiÀÄgÀªÀ, UËqÀÄè, EgÀļÀgï, EgÀÄ°UÁ, PÉÆgÀUÁ, ªÉÄ®PÀÄr, ªÀįÉÊPÀÄr, ªÀįÉÃgÀÄ, ªÉÄÃzÁ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÉÆÃqÀ ¥ÀAUÀqÀUÀ½UÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀ C¨sÀåyðUÀ½UÉ MlÄÖ 20 ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼À ¥ÉÊQ ±ÉÃPÀqÁ 50 ¨sÁUÀzÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼À£ÀÄß CAzÀgÉ 10 ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼À£ÀÄß F ªÉÄïÁÌt¹zÀ Forest Dwelling Tribes C¨sÀåyðUÀ½UÉ «ÄøÀ°j¸À¯ÁVzÉ 2 ¨ÁåPï¯ÁUï ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÉÃjzÀAvÉ MlÄÖ
12 ºÀÄzÉÝUÀ¼ÀÄ Forest Dwelling Tribes C¨sÀåyðUÀ½UÉ «ÄøÀ°j¸À¯ÁVzÉ"
12. To claim posts meant for Local Dwelling Tribes, a candidate shall belong to the community mentioned therein i.e., Jenukuruba, Kadukuruba, Hakkipikki, Soliga, Soligaru, Yarava, Gowdlu, Irular, Iruliga, Koraga, Melakudi, Malaikudi, Maleru, Medha and Thoda communities. The respondent Nos.1 to 6 either belong to Soliga or Yarava, which are included in the Forest Dwelling Tribes as mentioned in the recruitment notification. All those communities mentioned therein are identified as Forest Dwelling Tribes. The above communities put
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021 together is called as Forest Dwelling Tribes. If a candidate belongs to any one of the community mentioned therein, he could claim post meant for Forest Dwelling Tribes.
13. A perusal of the format of the application, it only requires 'category claimed' and 'sub-caste'. Nowhere it requires to be mentioned as Local Dwelling Tribes.
Moreover, in the applications, the candidates have furnished address within the forest area. When there is no requirement to mention 'Forest Dwelling Tribe' and when it only requires mentioning of 'category claimed' and 'sub-
caste', petitioners could not have refused to consider the candidatures of respondent Nos.1 to 6 for appointment to the post of Forest Watchers. The words "Forest Dwelling Tribes" is used to identify the group of castes and the purpose is to provide employment to the tribes who are living within the forest area. It is not in dispute that the respondents are living in the forest area, as per the address shown by them in the application.
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:51395-DB WP No. 16280 of 2021
14. Moreover, in pursuance to the interim order dated 08.03.2022, the petitioners appointed respondent Nos.2 to 6 as Forest Watchers in terms of appointment order dated 11.01.2023. We are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal.
15. There is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly writ petition stands dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/-
(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE SMJ,NC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9