Disposed

Sri P Prasanna Kumar v. the Managing Director

Karnataka HC25 May 2023WP/6736/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners sought direction to the BESCOM authorities to consider their representation regarding absorption of their service. The Court disposed of the matter by directing the corporation to consider the representation.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent Corporation to consider the petitioners' representation dated 20.01.2020 for absorption of service within eight weeks of the certified copy of this order.

Sri P Prasanna Kumar Vs the Managing… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 6736 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.6736 OF 2021 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR S/O SRI A. N. PILLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, C/O KRISHNE GOWDA, R/AT NO.390, JAYANAGAR 9^TH CROSS, KOLARA-563101.

¶9

SRI K. S. SRIDHAR S/O SRI K. R. SAMPANGI RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.1337, BALAJIGARA STREET, KATHARIPALYA, KOLARA-563101.

¶10

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI SRINIVASA V. S/O SRI VENKATARAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, NEAR 3^RD CROSS, PALASANDRA LAYOUT, KOLARA-563101.

¶12

SRI R. SURESH BABU S/O LATE RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.3423, NEAR SHARADHA WOMEN'S COLLEGE, BHAGATH SINGH ROAD, MUTHYALAPETE,

¶13

¶14

WP No. 6736 of 2021

¶15

MULABAGILU.

¶16

SRI MOHAMMED SHABHEER AHMED S/O LATE ABDUL SALAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R.AT NO.912, FORT KOLARA-563131.

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA K.,ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BESCOM, K R CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶21

THE GENERAL MANAGER (A AND HR) BESCOM, K R CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶22

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) BESCOM, DIVISION OFFICE, KOLAR-560131.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI.B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 20.01.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-N TO N4 RESPECTIVELY AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THEM TO ABSORB THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONERS AS PROBATIONARY MAZDOORS FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF 6 YEARS OF TEMPORARY SERVICE ALONG

¶26

¶27

WP No. 6736 of 2021

¶28

WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS INCLUDING SENIORITY, PROPERY PAY FIXATION, DIFFERENCE OF SALARY AND PROMOTION ETC.

¶29

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

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶32

The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners have approached the respondent-Corporation by representation dated 20.01.2020 (Annexure-N to N4) interalia sought for absorption of their service in the respondent-Corporation as Probationary Mazdoors from

¶33

the date of completion of six years of temporary service along with consequential benefits and same not been considered by the respondent-authorities.

¶34

Having taken note of the averments made in

¶35

the writ petition that, the grievance of the petitioners is with regard to seeking benefit of absorption of their

¶36

service on par with other persons appointed by the respondent-Corporation, I am of the view that, the

¶37

¶38

WP No. 6736 of 2021

¶39

respondent-Corporation shall consider the representation dated 20.01.2020 (Annexure-N to N4) within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶40

SD/JUDGE

¶41

SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Sri P Prasanna Kumar v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri P Prasanna Kumar v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M Erasappa Vs Joint Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Chandranaik G Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Lingamma Vs the Karnataka Co-Operative

Sri Sudhakar K Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.B.M.Anil Kumar Vs Syndicate Bank

Sri J. Sheshappa , Vs the Principal