Allowed

Venkataraman Gouda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2012RP/1611/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The review petition was allowed, modifying the order dismissing the writ petition. The court held that the petitioner, appointed in 2008, is entitled to service weightage under Recruitment Regulations 2011 but not absorption, relying on a Principal Bench order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 24.7.2012 is modified to grant service weightage but denies absorption to the petitioner.

Venkataraman Gouda Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH

¶6

REVIEW PETITION No.1611/2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.63956/2012 (S)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VENKATARAMAN GOUDA S/O. DEVU GOUDA AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: PHYSICAL TEACHER IN MURARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, JOIDA, TQ: JOIDA, DIST: KARWAR (UK)

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M S HARAVI, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS SECRETARY TO EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, (PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION) M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE.

¶14

¶15

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/ SECRETARY KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (R) NO. 179, 3RD FLOOR, ROOPA COMPLEX, SHESHADRIPURAM, IST MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE.

¶16

THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, KARWAR, DIST: KARWAR

¶17

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KARWAR, DIST: KARWAR

¶18

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYATH, KARWAR, DIST: KARWAR

¶19

THE PROPRIETOR, M/S. PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT BUREAU, MAN POWER RECRUITMENT AGENCY, I.T.I. BUILDING, IST FLOOR, K.R. PURAM, ROAD, SHIMOGGA, DIST: SHIMOGA. ... RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT MEGHA C. KOLEKAR, HCGP FOR R1-R6, NOTICE TO R-7 DISPENSED WITH)

¶21

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED U/O.47 RULE 1 OF CPC R/W. ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DT:24.07.2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.63956/2012 (SREG), ON THE FILE OF THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD, AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

This Review Petition is filed praying to review the order dated 24.7.12 passed by this Court in W.P.No.63956/12.

¶26

Heard.

¶27

This Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the writ petition relying on the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others vs. Umadevi (3) and Others, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, wherein it has been held that there is no statutory provision to regularize the services of temporary, contractual, casual or daily wage employees.

¶28

The case of the petitioner is that, he was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the Morarji Desai Residential School Joida, Dist: Karwar. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Notification issued by the Government for recruiting the teaching and nonteaching staff in the residential schools through the C.E.T.

¶29

¶30

without giving any weightage to the teachers already working in the said residential schools. Further, the petitioner contends that service weightage has to be extended to him in the light of the Order rendered by the Principal Bench in W.P.Nos.20204-20364/12 & connected matters disposed of on 13.7.2012. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that, the above order passed by the Principal Bench was not available to the petitioner and hence he could not produce the same before this Court as on the date of disposal of his writ petition on 24.7.2012.

¶31

The petitioner was appointed as Physical Education Teacher by the 7^th respondent on 21.5.2008 and was deputed to Morarji Desai Residential School, Joida, Dist: Karwar. As per the decision rendered by the Principal Bench of this Court in the above said writ petitions, all the Principals and Teachers including the petitioners therein appointed on or after 2004-2005 are entitled for the benefit of service weightage as specified in Recruitment Regulations, 2011.

¶32

¶33

Accordingly, the Review Petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.7.2012 in W.P.63956/2012 is modified in terms of the Order rendered by the Principal Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.20204-20364/12 & connected matters disposed of on 13.7.2012. Further, it is emphasized that the petitioner is not entitled for absorption. The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of only service weightage depending upon the period of service rendered by him as per the recruitment rules.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Sub/

Venkataraman Gouda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkataraman Gouda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Anwarbi @ Raziya Begum W/O. Ramzan Sab, Vs Union of India

Ashok S/O. Hanamangouda Malipatil Vs the State R/by Secretary

West Coast Paper Mills Ltd., Vs Amrut Hegde S/O. Mallappa Hegde

G Hulikuntappa S/O G Huleppa Vs the State of Karnataka

Drakshayani @ Kamalavva W/O. Gurusiddappa Halasur Vs Lalita W/O. Basavaraj Halasur

Pramod S/O. Prabhu Sadarahalli Vs State of Karnataka by Its Pp