The Managing Director Vs Tukaram — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

The Managing Director Vs Tukaram — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the appellants; writ appeal dismissed. Operative directions preserved: Corporation to issue notice to respondent 1 to report for duty as Assistant Store Keeper within three weeks, failing which the claim is deemed abandoned; if he joins, salary etc. payable from the date of reporting.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent 1, holder of a Diploma in Tool and Die Making Technology, is qualified for the post of Assistant Storekeeper for which the Notification dated 06.01.2016 prescribed a 3 years Diploma in Mechanical or Automobile Engineering without mentioning equivalent qualifications, in view of the Government's clarification that the Tool and Die Making diploma is equivalent. +1 more

Court's answer

On the Government's own clarification that the Diploma in Tool and Die Making is equivalent to the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and Automobile Engineering, the Court found that respondent 1 is qualified for the post of Assistant Store Keeper.

Ratio / Principle

The writ appeal is dismissed.

Key takeaways

The Corporation is directed to issue notice to respondent 1 calling upon him to report to duty for the post of Assistant Store Keeper within a period of three weeks from the date of issuance of the notice.ratio¶48
In case respondent 1 does not report for duty, it would be deemed that he has abandoned the claim and is not interested in joining the duty.ratio¶48
In case respondent 1 joins duty for the said post, he would be entitled for salary etc., from the date of reporting to duty.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal No. 5 of 2024 (S-KSRTC), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 08.07.2026 (D K Singh and T.M.Nadaf, JJ.; judgment per D K Singh, J.): KSRTC's intra-court appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act against the writ Court's order dated 13.04.2023 in W.P.No.3573/2019 (S-KSRTC) — insofar as it directed consideration of writ petitioner No.3 for appointment — DISMISSED. The Notification dated 06.01.2016 prescribed, for the post of Assistant Storekeeper, a 3 years Diploma in Mechanical or Automobile Engineering and did not mention equivalent qualifications; respondent 1 (Tukaram), whose name had figured in the provisional list, was rejected during document verification because his Diploma in Tool and Die Making Technology was treated as not equivalent to the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering. Held: proceeding on the Government's clarification (Notification dated 18.03.2005, referred by counsel) that the Diploma in Tool and Die Making is equivalent to the Diplomas in Mechanical and Automobile Engineering, respondent 1 is qualified for the post of Assistant Store Keeper. Directions: the Corporation to issue notice to respondent 1 to report for duty within three weeks of the notice, failing which he would be deemed to have abandoned the claim; if he joins duty, salary etc. is payable from the date of reporting.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2024 (S-KSRTC)

BETWEEN:

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C. NO. 115, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027.

Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER (RECRUITMENT) K.S.R.T.C. NO. 115, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027.

(BY Ms. H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE)

AND:

TUKARAM S/O. CHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. GIRISH NAGAR, JAMAKHANDI TALUK, BAGALKOT DISTRICT.

…APPELLANTS

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, COLLEGE AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

DEPARTMENT, NO. 645, 6TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SKILL DEVELOPMENT ENTREPRENEURSHIP LIVELIHOOD DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO. 347, 3RD FLOOR, GATE NO. M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

THE UNDER SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. M.N.SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R2 - R4; R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.04.2023 IN WP No.3573/2019 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE PORTION OF THE ORDER DIRECTING TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF PETITIONER No.3 FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 13.04.2023 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.3573/2019 (S-KSRTC) by the 1^st respondent herein and two others.

2. Despite the service of notice in the appeal, the 1^st respondent is not represented to contest the appeal filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation' ).

3. The appellant/Corporation had issued Notification dated 06.01.2016 calling upon eligible candidates for making selection and recruitment to the posts of non-Supervisory and Mechanical Department. The 1^st respondent claiming to be eligible for appointment to the said post submitted application in pursuance to the said notification. The 1^st respondent's name figured in the provisional list of the selected candidates. However, during verification of the documents, the Corporation rejected the claim of the 1^st respondent herein on the ground that Diploma in Tool and Die Making technology provided by

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

the Government was not equivalent to the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering.

4. Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the Notification dated 06.01.2016 calling applications from the eligible candidates for making recruitment would specifically provide that for the post of Assistant Storekeeper, the candidate must have passed 3 years Diploma in Mechanical or Automobile Engineering from the recognized Institution. The qualification prescribed was very specific, and it did not mention any equivalent qualification. Therefore, as per the Government Notification dated 18.03.2005 even if the Diploma in Tool and Die Making is to be treated as equivalent to Diploma in Mechanical Engineering, the same would not be of any benefit to the 1^st respondent inasmuch as the qualifications were fixed i.e., three years Diploma in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering. Admittedly the 1st respondent did not have diploma either in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering and therefore, having Diploma in Tool and Die Making Technology would not make him qualify for the post. It is thus, submitted

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

that the impugned judgment and order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside.

5. When questioned, the learned counsel for the Corporation that as to whether the Corporation can ignore the direction for the Notification issued by the Government or the Corporation is bound by any direction or notification issued by the Government?

6. Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the fact that Corporation would be bound by any such direction as may be issued by the State Government. When the Government itself has clarified that Diploma in Tool and Die Making would be equivalent to the Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and Automobile Engineering, we do not find that the 1^st respondent would not be qualified for the post of Assistant Store Keeper. Thus we dismiss this writ appeal.

7. The Corporation is directed to issue notice to the 1^st respondent calling upon him to report to duty for the post of Assistant Store Keeper within a period of three weeks from the date of issuance of the notice. In case he does not report for duty, it would be deemed that he has abandoned the claim and

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:34444-DB WA No. 5 of 2024

HC-KAR

not interested in joining the duty. In case the 1^st respondent

joins duty for the said post, he would be entitled for salary etc.,

from the date of reporting to duty.

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

NG CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7