Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.23 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
State Of Karnataka & Ors vs M.L. Kesari & Ors on 3 August, 2010
3.3. This Court vide order dated 08.04.2021, when
directed for consideration of the petitioner's claim to get
the benefit of regularization in terms of the decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State
of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi (3), (2006) 4 SCC-1 and
State of Karnatak vs. M.L. Keshari, (2010) 9 SCC
247, such claim of the petitioner was rejected relying
on the notification dated 12.11.2013 so issued by the
Govt. in the G.A. and P.G. Department and on the
ground that Group-C and Group-D posts like watch
and ward, cleaning and sweeping and gardening etc.
are to be filled up through outsourcing.
3.4. While assailing the impugned order, learned
counsel for the petitioner contended that similarly
Page 3 of 17
// 4 //
situated person engaged as contingent paid Chowkidar
was regularized pursuant to the order passed by the
Collector, Kandhamal on 18.01.2021 under Annexure-
13 series. It is also contended that request made by
the Collector, Kandhamal in his letter dated
18.01.2021, were duly implemented and the said
implementation has been admitted by Opp. Party
Nos.3 and 4 in Para-17 of the counter affidavit. Para-
17 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:-
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015
3.3. This Court vide order dated 08.04.2021, when
directed for consideration of the petitioner's claim to get
the benefit of regularization in terms of the decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State
of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi (3), (2006) 4 SCC-1 and
State of Karnatak vs. M.L. Keshari, (2010) 9 SCC
247, such claim of the petitioner was rejected relying
on the notification dated 12.11.2013 so issued by the
Govt. in the G.A. and P.G. Department and on the
ground that Group-C and Group-D posts like watch
and ward, cleaning and sweeping and gardening etc.
are to be filled up through outsourcing.
3.4. While assailing the impugned order, learned
counsel for the petitioner contended that similarly
Page 3 of 17
// 4 //
situated person engaged as contingent paid Chowkidar
was regularized pursuant to the order passed by the
Collector, Kandhamal on 18.01.2021 under Annexure-
13 series. It is also contended that request made by
the Collector, Kandhamal in his letter dated
18.01.2021, were duly implemented and the said
implementation has been admitted by Opp. Party
Nos.3 and 4 in Para-17 of the counter affidavit. Para-
17 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:-
Shripal vs Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad on 12 September, 2023
"13. As we have observed in both Jaggo (Supra)
and Shripal (Supra), outsourcing cannot become a
convenient shield to perpetuate precariousness and
to sidestep fair engagement practices where the work
is inherently perennial. The Commission's further
contention that the appellants are not "full-time"
1