Dismissed¶34

Shri Ravikumar P J v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2026WP/23806/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Probation-declaration mandamus writ petition (Art. 226/227) by two KSMACL employees (driver and attender) seeking satisfactory probation declaration, arrears and consequential benefits, and consideration of representation dtd. 22.12.2022 (Annx-B3); respondents issued an endorsement; petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to challenge the endorsement; no adjudication on merits. NC: 2026:KHC:25669; Justice Ashok S. Kinagi; decided 02-06-2026.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge the endorsement issued by the respondents; no relief granted on the merits. ¶34

Shri Ravikumar P J Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:25669 WP No. 23806 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶8

WRIT PETITION No. 23806 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SHRI RAVIKUMAR P J S/O. SHRI. JAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS DRIVER, KARNATAKA STATE MARKETING COMMUNICATION AND ADVERTISING LIMITED, NO. 42, MILLERS ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 052.

¶11

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

R/AT PILLAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE GEBEYARAHALLI POST KGF TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT.

¶13

SHRI. N. JAYAKUMAR S/O. SHRI. VEMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS ATTENDER, KARNATAKA STATE MARKETING COMMUNICATION AND ADVERTISING LIMITED, R/AT NO. 45, NANDI DURGA ROAD, BENSON TOWN POST, CHINNAPPA GARDEN, BANGALORE-560 046.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR.,ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:25669 WP No. 23806 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AND:

¶20

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶21

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE MARKETING COMMUNICATION AND ADVERTISING LIMITED, MCA HOUSE, 42, MILLERS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADV FOR R2)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO DECLARE THEIR PROBATION PERIOD AS SATISFACTORY ON COMPLETION OF PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AND GRANT THEM ARREARS AND ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS THAT THEY WOULD BE ENTITLED TO ON DECLARATION OF THEIR PROBATION PERIOD. TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 22.12.2022 VIDE ANNX-B3 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS AND GRANT THEM ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

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

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:25669 WP No. 23806 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking for a mandamus directing the respondents to declare the probationary period of the petitioners.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents have considered the request of the petitioners and issued an endorsement. Hence, the petitioners seek leave of the Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to challenge the endorsement issued by the respondents. A memo is also filed to this effect.

¶33

Memo is taken on record.

¶34

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

¶35

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶36

RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Shri Ravikumar P J v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Ravikumar P J v. the State of Karnataka

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

Ananda J, Vs State of Karnataka

Gangegowda Vs Mahalingappa

Sri.B.L.Narasimha Murthy, Vs the Managing Director, and Disciplinary Authority

Sri Narasimha Murthy S R Vs the Government of Karnataka

Sri. B. Prakash, Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Tasneem Ali Vs the State of Karnataka