Karnataka High Court
Sri Y.M.Nagendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 July, 2013
Author: L.Narayana Swamy
Bench: L. Narayana Swamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY
WRIT PETITION NOs: 6413-27/2013 (S-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NOs: 6428-42/2013 (S-RES)
IN W.P.NOS.6413-27/2013
BETWEEN:
1.SRI Y.M.NAGENDRA
S/O LATE R. MADAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
CITY MUNCIPAL COUNCIL
KOLLEGALA
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT.
2.SRI E.VINODKUMAR
S/O ERANAGA BHOVI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
RAMANAGARA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
3.SRI M R SHIVAKUMAR
S/O RAMASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
PUTTUR
DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 201.
2
4.SRI SRIDHAR NAIK
S/O LATE ANNU NAIK
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
ULLALA
DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 159.
5.SRI DOMIC J DMELLO
S/O B G DMELLO
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
BANTWALA
DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 272.
6.SRI K.PURUSHOTHAM
S/O S.N.KENCHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN PANCHAYATH
T NARASIPURA
MYSORE DIST-570001.
7.SRI MAHAVEERA ARIGA
S/O LATE P.DHANAKEERTHI ARIGA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
BELTAHNAGADI TOWN PANCHAYATH
DAKSHINA KANNADA-572 171.
8.SRI S MANJUNATH
S/O C SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
KOLELGALA
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 313.
3
9.SRI MAHABALESHWARA D C
S/O D CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
JOG-KARGAL, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201
10.SRI H D JAYASHEELA
S/O DADAPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN PANCHAYAT
THIRTHAHALLI
SHIMOGA-577 201.
11.SRI M AMARESH
S/O M SHIVASHANKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
MANVI
RAICHUR DISTRICT-570210.
12.SRI UMESH
S/O ANDANAOWDA AOJANAHALLI
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
GADAG
GADAG DISTRICT-577012.
13.SRI GOPAL
S/O UPAMATHY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGIEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
KAMPLI, HOSPET TALUK
BELLARY DISTRICT-570101.
4
* 14.SRI B S PATIL
S/O SHANKARGOUDA PATIL
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS , JUNIOR ENGINEER
URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BIJAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT-571 012.
15.SRI K V RAMESH
S/O VENKATAGIRIYAPPA K
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,JUNIOR ENGINEER
DODDABALLAPUR
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-570058.
...PETITIONERS
(By Sri A NAGARAJAPPA FOR NAGARAJAPPA & ASSOCIATES)
AND
1.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
KARNATAKA GOVT SECRETARIAT
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE 560 001.
2.THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
DR VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560 001.
**3.SRI K.M.MADHUSUDAN
S/O MADE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
WORKING AS JUNIOR ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MANDYA
RESIDING AT NO.122, CHETAN NILAYA
VANI VILAS LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR II STAGE
MYSORE-570017.
4.SRI G.S.SADASHIVAPPA
S/O G.N.SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
WORKING AS JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
HUNSUR, MYSORE DISTRICT
RESIDING AT NO.19, K.H.B.COLONY
1ST STAGE, MYSORE ROAD, HUNSUR.
5.SRI D.S.KUMARA
S/O D.S.SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
WORKING AS JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
K.R.PET, MANDYA DISTRICT
RESIDING AT NO.150/E, 7TH CROSS
H BLOCK, HEALTH COLONY
2ND STAGE, RAMAKRISHNANAGAR
MYSORE *.
* This page is retyped vide chamber order dt 24.9.13
** Corrected vide chamber order dt. 24.9.13
5
* 6.SRI SHETTY DEEPAK KRISHNA
S/O H.R.KRISHNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
WORKING AS JUNIOR ENGINEER
TOWN PANCHAYATH, PERIYAPATNA
MYSORE DISTRICT-571107
RESIDING AT NO.727, PETE MAIN ROAD
HOLENARASIPURA,HASSAN DISTRICT.
7.SRI C.MANJUNATHA
S/O CHIKKABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
JUNIOR ENGINEER,TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
BANNUR, T.NARASIPURA TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT.** ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATRI AGA FOR R1 & R2,
SRI S G PANDIT, ADV., FOR R3-R7)
IN W.P.NOS.6428-42/2013
BETWEEN:
1.SRI B.RAJE GOWDA
S/O LATE BORAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN PANCHAYATH
NAGAMANGALA
MANDYA DISTRICT
R/AT C/O BYRAVESHWARA NILAYA
T B EXTENSION, NAGAMANGALA
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401
2.SRI M S RAGHUNATH
S/O SREERAMULU
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
GUDIBANDA
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
R/AT # 40, WARD NO.9
LAKSHMI NIVASA
BAGEPALLI TOWN
CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT-562101.
3.SRI M R JAYANNA
S/O M S RAJEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, CHAMARAJANAGARA
R/AT NO. 4419, J BLOCK*
KANAKADARA NAGARA
MYSORE-570022.
4.SRI VEERAGANGADHARASWAMY S M
S/O K M SHIVANANDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS *
* This page is retyped vide chamber order dt 24.9.13
** Corrected vide chamber order dt. 24.9.13
6
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SHIMOGA
R/AT "NAMMANE"
OPP. VINAYAKA PARK
BASAVANAGUDI
SHIMOGA-577201.
5.SRI H C RAVINDRA
S/O CHANNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
HUNSUR, MYSORE DISTRICT
R/A # NO. 36, NES COLONY
HUNSUR
MYSORE DISTRICT-570 001.
6.SRI G P ANANDA
S/O PUTTASWAMY GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN PANCHAYATH, ALUR
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201
R/AT OPP. UDAYAGIRI EXTENSION
HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.
7.SRI A R PADMANABHA REDDY
S/O B RAMA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SRINIVASAPUR
KOLAR DISTRICT
R/A APPPSANAHALLI
MITTAHALLI POST
CHINTAMANI TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101.
8.SRI H M RANGANATH
7
S/O H R MURIGENDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
CHITRADURGA-577526
MASZID ROAD, YADAV BEEDHI
HOLLAKLERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577526.
9.SRI A R MURALIDHARA
S/O LATE B R RAMACHANDRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
RAMANAGAR DISTRICT
R/AT "ASHIRVADA"
RANGANATHASWAMY BADAVANE
G M ROAD, GANDHINAGAR
MAGADI
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562120.
10.SMT. SHEELA S JOGUR
D/O S M JOGUR
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
ALAND
R/AT PLOT NO. 11
BHAGYAWANTI NAGAR
UDNOOR LAYOUT
NEW JEWARGI ROAD
GULBARGA-585 101.
11.SRI K MAHADEVA
S/O KATTE DURUGAPPA
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SIRUGUPPA
BELLARY DISTRICT
8
* R/AT C/O MUDDAPUR POST
HOSPET TALUK, BELLARY DISTRICT-583 132.
12.SRI M ABDUL HAMEED
S/O M ABDUL SALAM SAB
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SANDUR, BELLARY DISTRICT
R/AT NO. 7TH WARD, KUMBAR STREET
KUDLIGE TOWN, BELLARY DISTRICT-583 101.
13.SRI SANJAY KULKARNI
S/O HANMANTHA RAO
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL YADAGIRI
R/AT NO. 4487, AMBEDKAR CIRCLE
STATION ROAD, YADGIRI DISTRICT-585 202.
14.SRI CHANDRAPPA
S/O RAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
LINGASUGUR, RAICHUR DIST.
R/AT AMARESHWAR COLONY
H.NO. 2-12, 3/20, LINGASUGUR
RAICHUR DISTRICT-584 101.
15.SRI C N JAGADESHA
S/O C R NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI
TUMKUR DISTRICT
R/AT TIRUMALA, 9TH CROSS
ASHOK NAGAR, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572101.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI A NAGARAJAPPA FOR M/S A NAGARAJAPP & ASSOCIATES)
AND
1.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
KARNATAKA GOVT. SECRETARIAT
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE-560001.
2.THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
DR VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE-560001.
**3.R.PRATHAP
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O T.RAMACHANDRA
WORKING AS ASSISTANTENGINEER, *
* This page is retyped vide chamber order dt 24.9.13
** Corrected vide chamber order dt. 24.9.13
9
* CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
MANDYA.
4.KALLAPPA K.KAMMAR
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O SUBRAY KAMMAR
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
SIRSI.
5.PURANDAR M.KOTTIAN
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
S/O MAHABALA KOTIAN
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
MADIKERE.
6.NARASU KALANTRE
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
S/O BALU KALANTRE
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
KANAKAPURA.
7.H.S.NIRANJANAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O SOMASHEKARAIAH
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
BADRAVATHI.
8.K.S.ANILKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O K.G.SURYANARAYANA
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL
ADMINISTRATION, 10TH FLOOR
V.V.TOWER, BANGALORE-560001.
9.VITTAL TADASALUR
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
S/O SIDDAPPA TADASALUR
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
GOKAK.** ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M NAGAPRASANNA, ADV., FOR R3 & R9,
SRI RAGHAVENDRA G. GAYATRI, AGA FOR R1 & R2 )
***
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLRE THE RULE
4(ii) OF THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPALITIES [ABSORPTION OF THE
EMPLOYES APPOINTED UNDER THE SCHEME OF SWARNA JAYANTHI
SHAHAR ROZGAR YOJANA [SJSRY] IN URBAN LOCAL BODIES RUELS 2005
IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, ULTRAVIRES & CONTRARY TO ARTICLES 14 & 16
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. *
* This page is retyped vide chamber order dt 24.9.13
** Corrected vide chamber order dt. 24.9.13
10
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioners in W.P.Nos.6413-27/2013 have challenged the validity of Rule 4(ii) of the Karnataka Municipalities [Absorption of the Employes Appointed under the Scheme of Swarna Jayanthi Shahar Rozgar Yojana [SJSRY] appointment under the scheme of Urban Local Bodies Rules 2005, herein after referred as "The Rules".
2. Further the petitioners challenged the Provisional Gradation list dated 19/10/2012 and further to consider the case of the petitioners from the date of initial appointment for their placing in the up gradation list with KPSC engineers counting the service of the petitioners since their appointments as temporary engineers in the respondent establishment. Their services are absorbed by virtue of the Rules 2005 referred above. Under Rule 4 of the Rules appointment in these rule were regularized under clause (ii) of Rule 11 4 the persons so absorbed they are entitled for absorption and pay fixation with seniority for all these purposes date of the absorption is the date. The learned counsel submits that this Rule 4 is arbitrary and is in violation of Article 14 for the reasons that it makes classification with persons absorbed and persons appointed by KPSC. When the persons are working as Junior Engineers there cannot be further reclassification as an appointment made by absorption and appointment made out of selections. Hence the learned counsel submits that the benefits offered to the persons appointment and selected by the public service commission and the same benefit to be extended to the petitioners whose services were absorbed in 2005. Hence the learned counsel submits to strictly consider the Rule 4(ii) of the Rules and direct the respondents to extend the benefit on par with the persons appointed by KPSC by taking into consideration their service with effect from initial appointment. To substantiate the same, learned counsel referred the Judgment reported 12 in AIR 1993 SC 2422 and another Judgment of this court in W.A.No.503/2011 and accordingly matter disposed on 30/11/2011, in the case referred the Hon'ble courts held that there cannot be any classification and persons to be treated on par with others.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted to dismiss this petition. When persons are appointed and absorbed by virtue of the rules and the persons having availed benefit cannot challenge the same. The services of the petitioners from initial appointment pay fixation gratuity and pension shall be considered as per the Rule 4 with effect from date of absorption. In the similar case including absorption regularization made pursuant to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dayal's daily wages and Uma Devi vs. State of Karnataka and in another similar case Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court held that the date of initial appointment cannot be taken for the benefit of pension and other benefits.
13
4. I have heard both the parties.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were not appointed on the basis of any rules. The initial appointment was not in accordance with any provisions of law and no reservation is provided either to Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribes, disabled persons, ex-military person, woman and rural backward people and the said appointment cannot be treated as regular appointment and cannot be counted for the purpose of gratuity, pension pay etc. This court is aware that if the prayer is considered the large number of employees through out the state and nation whose appointments were not considered for payment of pension and gratuity by this court as well as Supreme Court it will open a flood gate to them. Hence, I am not inclined to examine the validity Rule 4 of the rules. The classification could be found fault with, if both the persons are appointed under the same rules or stand under similar circumstances. Under these circumstances, initial 14 appointments were regularized later by way of absorption. Whereas, the persons appointed by public service commission was in accordance with law complying the requirement in view of employment rules and reservation rules. Under these circumstances, I do not find any good reason to uphold the contention of the petitioners.
Accordingly, the Writ Petitions No.6413-27/2013 stand dismissed.
In view of disposal of W.P.Nos.6413-27/2013 connected petitions, W.P.Nos.6428-42/2013 are also dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE SM