Allowed¶40

Kumari Gangawwa D/O Mallikarjuna Yaliger v. the Registrar (Recruitment)

Service law – Probation

Karnataka HC4 Jul 2025WP/103956/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Probation discharge — Peon, Civil Court, Bailahongal — Rule 6, Karnataka Civil Services (Probation) Rules, 1977 — confirmation of discharge order by next higher authority mandatory — discharge order passed without confirmation held contrary to Rule 6 and quashed — certiorari under Articles 226 & 227 — High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench — WP No. 103956 of 2025 — liberty to respondents to proceed in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; impugned order dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure-F) passed by the second respondent quashed, reserving liberty to the respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law; pending applications disposed of. ¶40

Kumari Gangawwa D/O Mallikarjuna Yaliger Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8423 WP No. 103956 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶5

DHARWAD BENCH

¶6

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 103956 OF 2025 (S-RES)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

KUMARI GANGAWWA D/O MALLIKARJUNA YALIGAR AGE 29 YEARS OCC. WORKING AS A PEON IN PRL. C J AND JMFC, BAILAHONGAL R/O. SUNADOLLI, TAULK MUDALAGI DISTRICT BELAGAVI-590001 …PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI.NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. F V PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶16

THE REGISTRAR (RECRUITMENT) HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-01.

¶17

THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT BELAGAVI-590001.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G GAYATHRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2:)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING OFFICE ORDER NO. 147/2025 BELAGAVI DATED. 20-062025 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F SO FAR PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶21

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8423 WP No. 103956 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶24

ORAL ORDER/

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)

¶26

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 20.06.2025 vide Annexure-F, passed by the second respondent, whereby the petitioner has been discharged from service.

¶27

The petitioner was appointed as a Peon by the second respondent on 02.02.2023. When she was on probation, the impugned order dated 20.06.2025 vide Annexure-F has been passed and she has been discharged from the service. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed contrary to Rule 6 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Probation) Rules, 1977 (for

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8423 WP No. 103956 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

short, Probation Rules’). The respondent passed the impugned order without the confirmation from the higher authority. On that short ground, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶32

The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that under Rule 6 of the Probation Rules the order passed by the second respondent for discharging the petitioner has to be confirmed by the next higher authority. In this case, it has not been confirmed by the next higher authority. Before confirmation, the impugned order has been passed discharging the petitioner from service.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers.

¶34

The petitioner was working as a Peon in Civil Court, Bailahongal. When he was on probation, the impugned order vide Annexure-F has been passed discharging the petitioner from service as per Rule 6 of the Probation Rules. The discharge order passed by the competent authority has to be

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8423 WP No. 103956 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

confirmed by the next higher authority. In the case on hand, the impugned order Annexure-F is not confirmed by the next higher authority. Since the impugned order is contrary to Rule 6 of Probation Rules, on that short ground, the order is liable to be quashed.

¶38

Accordingly, the following order is passed:

¶39

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶40

(ii) The impugned order dated 20.06.2025 vide Annexure-F passed by the second respondent is quashed reserving liberty to the respondents to take appropriate action, in accordance with law.

¶41

(iii) In view of disposal of the petition, all pending applications stand disposed of.

¶42

Sd/(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶43

Cm/-

¶44

LIST NO.: 19 SL NO.: 2

Kumari Gangawwa D/O Mallikarjuna Yaliger v. the Registrar (Recruitment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Gangawwa D/O Mallikarjuna Yaliger v. the Registrar (Recruitment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The President and Anr. Vs the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Shakuntala Vs the Registrar General and Ors.

Vijayalakshmi W/O Shivaraj Mugappara Vs the State of Karnataka

Gousia Begum Vs the Registrar General

Sharanayya S/O Soppayya Vs the Registrar (Recruitment)

The Secretary Akkamahadevi Mahila Sangha Apachand Vs the State of Karnataka and Ors.