Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt a S Ramadevi Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Smt a S Ramadevi Vs State of KarnatakaSmt a S Ramadevi v. State of Karnataka

Disposed¶57

Smt a S Ramadevi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Dec 2025WP/3268/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regularisation of daily wage employee from completion of ten years of service; retired Literate Assistant (S.D.A.) of Mysore City Corporation with over 30 years of service; denial of pension under Old Pension Scheme; Government Order No.U.D.D.46 A.C.M. 2020 (E) dated 11.09.2020 (Annexure-P); official memorandum No.C.E.S.T.(2): CR:38:2020-21 dated 22.10.2020 (Annexuure-Q); regularisation effected by Government Order dated 06.06.2022; compliance on 07.07.2022; writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking certiorari and mandamus; disposed of as infructuous; State of Karnataka Dept. of Urban Development; Justice Ashok S. Kinagi; decided 05.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief adjudicated; the writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous after the respondents regularised the petitioner's service upon completion of 10 years of daily-wage service per Government Order dated 06.06.2022.

Why is it important?

Since the respondents had already regularised the petitioner's service after completion of 10 years of daily-wage service as per the Government Order dated 06.06.2022 and respondent No.2 had complied, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition. ¶53

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief adjudicated; the writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous after the respondents regularised the petitioner's service upon completion of 10 years of daily-wage service per Government Order dated 06.06.2022.

Issue for consideration

Whether the denial of regularisation of the petitioner's service with effect from the date of completion of ten years of service as a daily wage employee (Government Order dated 11.09.2020) was sustainable in law. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the respondents had already regularised the petitioner's service after completion of 10 years of daily-wage service as per the Government Order dated 06.06.2022 and respondent No.2 had complied, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous, and pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Ashok S. Kinagi, J.), Writ Petition No. 3268 of 2022 (S-RES), decided 05.12.2025: A retired daily-wage employee of Mysore City Corporation, who had served over 30 years and retired on superannuation, challenged (i) Government Order No.U.D.D.46 A.C.M. 2020 (E) dated 11.09.2020 denying regularisation of her service from the date of completion of ten years of daily-wage service, and (ii) official memorandum/order No.C.E.S.T.(2): CR:38:2020-21 dated 22.10.2020 denying her pension under the Old Pension Scheme, seeking certiorari and mandamus under Articles 226 and 227. During pendency, the respondents regularised her service after completion of ten years of daily-wage service as per Government Order dated 06.06.2022, and respondent No.2 effected compliance on 07.07.2022. Nothing therefore survived for consideration, and the writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous, with pending applications disposed of accordingly.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 3268 OF 2022 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT A S RAMADEVI

W/O M S JANAKIRAM

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

RETIRED LITERATE ASSISTANT (S.D.A.)

MYSORE CITY CORPORATION, R/AT NO.787, 4TH MAIN, 24TH CROSS, VIDYARANYAPURAM MYSURU SOUTH

MYSURU-570008

Digitally signed by SHILPABAI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA P D, ADV.)

AND:

…PETITIONER

STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPT. OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

2 -

HC-KAR

2. THE MYSORE CITY CORPORATION

MYSORE-570024

DIST MYSORE

BY ITS COMMISSIONER

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. B.SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1,

SMT. M.P.GEETHADEVI, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITTUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER MADE IN VIDE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 11.09.2020,(ANNEXURE-P) PASSED BY THE R1,IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO DENYING THE REGULARIZATION OF THE SERVICE OF THE PETITIONER WITH EFFECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF TEN YEARS OF SERVICE AS DAILY WAGE EMPLOYEE,BEING ARBITRARY,ERRONEOUS AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following prayers:

"a) Issue writ of certiorari or any other writ or order in the like nature setting aside the order made in vide Government Order No.U.D.D.46 A.C.M. 2020 (E) Bengaluru dtd.11.09.2020, (Annexure-P) passed by respondent No.1, insofar as it pertains to denying the regulations of the service of the petitioner with effective from the date of completion of ten years of service as daily wage employee, being arbitrary, erroneous and not sustainable in law, in the interest of justice and equity.

b) Issue writ of certiorari or any other writ or order in the like nature setting aside the order made in vide official memorandum/order vide No.C.E.S.T.(2): CR:38:2020-21 dtd:22.10.2020 (Annexuure-Q) issued by the respondent No.2, wherein the petitioner is denied the pension under the Old Pension Scheme, being arbitrary, erroneous and not sustainable in law, in the interest of justice and equity.

c) Issue writ of mandamus or any other writ or order in the like nature directing the respondents to

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

HC-KAR

regularise the service of the petitioner with effective from completion of ten years of service as daily wage employee, granting all consequential service benefits including the grant of pension to the petitioner under Old Pension Scheme, in the interest of justice and equity.

d) Grant such other and further relief/s which this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case including the cost of this petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:

The petitioner is retired employee of respondent No.2-Establishment, initially appointed on daily wage basis. The petitioner has rendered service for more than 30 years in respondent No.2-Establishment. The petitioner retired from service after attending the superannuation. The petitioner had submitted a representation for regularisation of her service with the effect from the completion of 10 years of service from the initial date of appointment as daily wage employee. The respondents

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

HC-KAR

have not considered the representation for regularisation of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 filed a memo stating that the petitioner has challenged the impugned endorsements dated 11.09.2020 and 22.10.2020 as per Annexure P and Q and sought for mandamus directing the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner. The respondents have considered the case of the petitioner and has regularised the service of the petitioner after completion of 10 years of service as daily wage employee as per the Government Order dated 06.06.2022, and the copy of order dated 22.10.2020 is produced. Respondent No.2 has complied order dated 07.07/2022.

In view of the same, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:51167 WP No. 3268 of 2022

HC-KAR

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as

having become infructuous .

The pending applications, if any, stand disposed off accordingly.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

SSB

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the denial of regularisation of the petitioner's service with effect from the date of completion of ten years of service as a daily wage employee (Government Order dated 11.09.2020) was sustainable in law.medium confidence¶39
The court held
Since the respondents had already regularised the petitioner's service after completion of 10 years of daily-wage service as per the Government Order dated 06.06.2022 and respondent No.2 had complied, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition.ratio¶53
2.
Whether the denial of pension to the petitioner under the Old Pension Scheme (official memorandum/order dated 22.10.2020 issued by respondent No.2) was sustainable in law.medium confidence¶40

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227¶30

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Government Order No.U.D.D.46 A.C.M. 2020 (E) Bengaluru dtd.11.09.2020 (Annexure-P) passed by respondent No.1, denying regularisation of the petitioner's service from the date of completion of ten years of service as daily wage employee; and official memorandum/order No.C.E.S.T.(2): CR:38:2020-21 dtd:22.10.2020 (Annexuure-Q) issued by respondent No.2, denying pension under the Old Pension Scheme.¶39
Respondent No.1 - State of Karnataka, Dept. of Urban Development; Respondent No.2 - Mysore City Corporation · 11.09.2020 and 22.10.2020
Prior proceeding
Petitioner was initially appointed on daily wage basis in respondent No.2-Establishment, rendered more than 30 years of service and retired on superannuation.¶48
Prior proceeding
Petitioner submitted a representation for regularisation of her service with effect from completion of 10 years of service from the initial date of appointment as daily wage employee; the respondents did not consider it, prompting the writ petition.¶48
Prior proceeding
During pendency, the respondents regularised the petitioner's service after completion of 10 years of daily-wage service as per Government Order dated 06.06.2022, and respondent No.2 effected compliance on 07.07.2022.¶52

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
SMT A S RAMADEVI¶8
SUBRAMANYA P D
respondent
STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPT. OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT¶18
B.SUKANYA BALIGA
respondent
THE MYSORE CITY CORPORATION, BY ITS COMMISSIONER¶23
M.P.GEETHADEVI

Coram

AI extract

ASHOK S.KINAGIauthor¶36

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 5 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 10 Feb 2022
Case no.: WP/3268/2022
CNR: KAHC010065622022
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: Ashok S.kinagi
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: WRIT PETITION (S-RES)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Ashok S.kinagi

Dr Maithreyi H L Vs the State of Karnataka
4 Dec 2025
Mr Godwin Santhosh D Souza Vs the State of Karnataka
4 Dec 2025
Sri Manuswaraj S Vs the State of Karnataka
4 Dec 2025
Smt Manjula H K Vs the Commissioner
5 Dec 2025
Shri Krishnakumar Narnakaje Vs the State of Karnataka
5 Dec 2025
Smt Kavitha M Warrangal Vs Deputy Secretary
5 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Smt a S Ramadevi v. State of Karnataka, WP/3268/2022 (KA), decided on 5 December 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Government Order No.U.D.D.46 A.C.M. 2020 (E) Bengaluru dtd.11.09.2020 (Annexure-P) passed by respondent No.1, denying regularisation of the petitioner's service from the date of completion of ten years of service as daily wage employee; and official memorandum/order No.C.E.S.T.(2): CR:38:2020-21 dtd:22.10.2020 (Annexuure-Q) issued by respondent No.2, denying pension under the Old Pension Scheme.Respondent No.1 - State of Karnataka, Dept. of Urban Development; Respondent No.2 - Mysore City Corporation · 11.09.2020 and 22.10.2020
Petitioner was initially appointed on daily wage basis in respondent No.2-Establishment, rendered more than 30 years of service and retired on superannuation.
Petitioner submitted a representation for regularisation of her service with effect from completion of 10 years of service from the initial date of appointment as daily wage employee; the respondents did not consider it, prompting the writ petition.

View full history

Bench / Coram

ASHOK S.KINAGI

Parties & counsel