Dismissed

Sri Bhaskar Billava H v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2024WP/18837/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition styled as PIL, the court addressed grievances regarding a government circular extending reservation policies to outsourced employees. The court dismissed the petition, citing its general, vague nature and the fact that such policy decisions lay outside judicial interference.

What did the court decide?

The petition challenging the circular dated 28.05.2024 regarding reservation for outsourced employees stands dismissed.

Sri Bhaskar Billava H Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:38885-DB WP No. 18837 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 18837 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. BHASKAR BILLAVA H., S/O NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, HOSMANE DOMBE, PADUVARI KUNDAPURA PADUVARI, UDUPI 576 214

¶11

Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

PAN NO. ACVPH 2306P AADHAR NO. 586539922078 MOB 9845680009 EMAIL BHASUNAGA @GMAIL.COM

¶13

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

…PETITIONER

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:38885-DB WP No. 18837 of 2024

¶19

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE 560 001

¶20

THE COMMISSIONER SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT 5^TH FLOOR, M. S. BUILDING, BANGALORE 560 001

¶21

THE JOINT DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT DR. BABU JAGAJIVANRAM BHAVAN, ADHIPAMPA ROAD, NARAYANASWAMY BLOCK, PADUVARAHALLI EAST BLOCK, MYSORE DISTRICT MYSORE 570 012

¶22

THE JOINT DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT PANCHAYATH BHAVAN 2^ND FLOOR, B.M. ROAD, RAMANAGAR 562 159

¶23

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GOVERNMENT OFFICES COMPLEX NEAR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE MANDYA 571 401

¶24

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:38885-DB WP No. 18837 of 2024

¶27

THE JOINT DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT NEHRU NAGAR (NEAR RAM DEV HOTEL ) BELAGUM 590 010

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)

¶30

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W RULE 14(1) OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE KARNATAKA PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2018 PRAYING TO a)ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE AND QUASH THE CIRCULAR DATED 20/05/2024 BEARING CASUE 06 SENEI 2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.

¶31

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

¶32

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶36

Heard learned Advocate Mr.Srinivas V., for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt.Nilofer Akbar for respondent - State who appeared to

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:38885-DB WP No. 18837 of 2024

¶39

assist the court upon service of copy of the petition in advance.

¶40

The grievance which is sought to be raised and agitated in this petition, styled as public interest litigation, is that as per the circular dated 28.05.2024, the Government of Karnataka has adopted the policy of reservation to follow the same also in respect of the employment done by outsourcing the employees.

¶41

The circular inter-alia mentions that in the cabinet

¶42

meeting dated 21.12.2003 it was decided to implement the reservation policy in the outsourced recruitment.

¶43

Two major reasons amongst other aspects weigh with the court in not entertaining the present petition.

¶44

Firstly, it is a matter of policy as to whether in the recruitment process, the reservation policy is followed or

¶45

not. The issue lies in the policy domain. Secondly, the petition could be said to be too general and vague not

¶46

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:38885-DB WP No. 18837 of 2024

¶48

disclosing any specific case of grievance. The court is not inclined to entertain the petition as public interest litigation.

¶49

6. However, it is observed that if any grievance of

¶50

individual nature arises, such grievance may be agitated in

¶51

accordance with law in an appropriate proceeding.

¶52

7. The petition stands dismissed.

¶53

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶54

Sd/(K V ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶55

SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Sri Bhaskar Billava H v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Bhaskar Billava H v. State of Karnataka

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

Umapathi S Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.C.Thimmarayappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri a Vijay Kumar Bhandary Vs Smt Kavitha S Mannikeri

Pranav Shastry Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Dharshan P Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Nyamagoudar Y L Vs State of Karnataka