Dismissed

Ramesha M v. the Managing Director and the Chairmen

Karnataka HC4 Dec 2023WP/23623/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition filed for the re-absorption of services at KSRTC. The Court held that since petitioners voluntarily agreed to work at BMTC and NWKTRC, the state had no obligation to consider their representations for re-absorption.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed holding no direction for re-absorption needed as petitioners volunteered for other services.

Ramesha M Vs the Managing Director and the Chairmen — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:43524 WP No. 23623 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.23623 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAMESHA M., S/O LATE G.MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A NO.455, 7^TH CROSS, K.C. LAYOUT, MYSORE - 570 011.

¶9

MAHESH KUMAR M., S/O LATE C.MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/A NO.107, 5^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, E AND F BLOCK, RAMKRISHNANAGARA, MYSORE - 570 022.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. M.C.BASAVARAJU., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AND THE CHAIRMEN, THE COMMITTEE FOR AUTONOMOUS, KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SMT.RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:43524 WP No. 23623 of 2023

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Sri.M.C.Basavaraju., learned counsel for the petitioners has appeared in person.

¶23

Smt.H.R.Renuka., learned counsel for the respondent has appeared through video conferencing.

¶24

The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to re-absorb the services of the petitioners at KSRTC by considering the representations dated:05.08.2023 made by the petitioners vide Annexure-G and H and etc.,

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent have urged several contentions. Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.

¶26

The representations submitted by the petitioners are furnished along with the Writ Petition vide Annexures-G and H. They are dated:05.08.2023. Suffice it to note that the first

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC:43524 WP No. 23623 of 2023

¶28

¶29

petitioner has voluntarily agreed to render his service at BMTC. Likewise, the second petitioner has voluntarily agreed to work at NWKTRC. The Corporation has passed the order on the 14^th day of August, 2023. Since the petitioners have voluntarily agreed to render their service, hence question of directing the Corporation to consider the representations does not arise. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits.

¶30

5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed .

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Ramesha M v. the Managing Director and the Chairmen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesha M v. the Managing Director and the Chairmen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dayananda Murthy K N Vs Sri Padmavathi Marketing

Smt Shylaja S C Vs the Union of India

The Divisional Controller Ksrtc Vs Sri.Syed Hussain

Smt B N Asha Vs M/S the Management of Mysore Hindi Prachara Parishad

Sri Mohammed Ali Alias Ali Hallalli Vs the State of Karnataka

The Chief Security & Vigilance Officer Vs Sri Hamsagiri C M