The court quashed appointments of two respondents as clerks and peons made by a Gram Panchayat without following state-mandated reservation rules under the Panchayat Raj Act, allowing the petitioner's writ petition partially.
Quashing of appointment resolutions dated 31.10.2013 regarding two respondents as Clerk and Peon.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO.100339/2014(S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SHRI VENKATARAMAN S/O. GUTYA HARIJAN, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: HONNEHADDA VILLAGE, POST:HARSIKATTA, TQ: SIDDAPUR – 581 335, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI D. L. LADKHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka
TALUK: SIDDAPUR – 581 335, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. SMITA B.H., ADVOCATE FOR SRI N.V.YAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R2, R3 AND R5 TO R7 IS SERVED)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE ANY WRIT OR ANY DIRECTION OR ANY ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING RESOLUTION PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED 15.09.2011 APPOINTING RESPONDENT NO.5 AS WATERMAN CUM MECHANIC ON HONORARY BASIS AND ALLOWING HIM TO DRAW SALARY AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
appointment of respondent No.5 who is appointed by the respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat to the post of Watermancum-Mechanic on honorarium basis as per the resolution dated 15.09.2011 and also questioning the appointment of respondent Nos.6 and 7 by the respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat as per the resolution dated 31.10.2013 to the post of Clerk and Peon under general category.
result in the entire action being illegal and vitiated. Hence seeks for allowing of the petition.
6. The submission is taken on records.
remained unrepresented.
the respondent No.5 having been appointed by only on temporary basis, the petitioner may not have any much grievance. However, as regards the appointment of respondent Nos. 6 and 7 is concerned, admittedly, since the respondentGram Panchayat, while issuing the notification has neither specified nor followed the reservation/roaster point rules. It is necessary also to refer Sections 112 and 113 of the Act, which reads as under:
“112. Staffing pattern and schedule of employees.- (1) The Government may, by order specify the staffing pattern the scales of Pay and mode of recruitment of staff of Panchayats.
(2) The Gram Panchayat shall, subject to subsection (1), determine and submit for a approval chief Executive Officer a schedule of employees specifying the designation and grades and the salaries and allowances payable to its offices other that the [Panchayat Development Officer, Secretary and Accounts Assistant] required for carrying out the duties imposed upon the Grama Panchayat by or under this Act.
113. Appointment and control of employees.- (1) Subject to the provisions of Sections 111 and 112 the Grama Panchayat may, with the prior approval of the Chief Executive Officer appoint other
employees of the Grama Panchayat and pay their salaries from the Grama Panchayat fund:
Provided that in making appointments the appointing authority shall reserve posts for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the same manner and to the same extent as is applicable for the recruitment to posts in the State Civil Services.
(2) The [Panchayat Development Officer] may, by order, fine, [x x x] or withhold the increment of any employee appointed by the Grama Panchayat.
(4) An appeal shall lie against an order passed by the [Panchayat Development officer] under sub-section (2) to the Executive Officer and against an order passed by the Grama Panchayat under sub-section (3) to the Chief Executive officer, [x x x x x].
(5) Any appeal under sub-section (4) pending before the Mandal Panchayat or the Zill Parishad on the date of commencement of the pathayat Raj than the date of commencement of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj the 1993, shall stand transferred respective the The Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer and
such appeal shall be decided by then as if it had been filed before them.”
SD/JUDGE
VB/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of clerks and peons violating reservation rules could be sustained.
Whether the temporary appointment of a waterman was challengeable by the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Venkataraman S/O. Gutya Harijan
State of Karnataka
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Karwar
Executive Officer, Taluka Panchayat, Siddapur
Grama Panchayat, Harsikatta
Shri Manjunath Yallappa Hasler
M.G.S. Kamal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
