- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO.275 OF 2022 (S-RES) BETWEEN: K. VENKATESH S/O KONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT. SUBBARAYANAPET NANDI ROAD CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN NOW R/AT 14, 2ND CROSS MUTHAMMA LAYOUT, VIJINAPURA BENGALURU 560016. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MUNIYAPPA M, ADV.,) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION IN KARNATAKA VISHWESHWARAIAH CENTRE DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560001. Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPUR DIST CHIKKABALLAURA. 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CHIKKBALLAPURA DIST. 5. THE COMMISSIONER MUNCIPAL COUNCIL, CHINTAMANI CHIKKABALLAPURA DIST. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. MANJUNATH B.R. ADV., FOR R5) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 28/09/2021 IN WP NO.926/2019 AND ALLOW THE PRAYER IN THE SAID WRIT PETITION OF GRANTING MANDAMUS TO CONSIDER HIS REPRESENTATION DATED 27/11/2006 AND TAKE THE APPELLANT BACK INTO SERVICE ALONG WITH CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AND ADMISSIBLE BACK WAGES & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 - Municipality as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The writ petition had been filed seeking directions to the respondents to consider Annexure-P representation filed by the appellant/writ petitioner dated 27.11.2006, as also, seeking a direction to respondent No.5 to reinstate the petitioner in service with all benefits. The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Junior Engineer on contract basis by respondent No.5 by resolution dated 30.11.1998. Thereafter, by Annexure-E Official Memorandum dated 29.09.2004 he was transferred from CMC- Chintamani to CMC-Vijayapura and the petitioner reported for duty at CMC-Vijayapura on 01.10.2004. Subsequently Annexure-G - Office Memorandum was passed on 26.11.2004 cancelling the transfer. On cancellation of the transfer, the petitioner was relieved of his duties by CMC-Vijayapura and he submitted Annexure-J representation dated 02.12.2004 to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 respondent No.2 requesting to continue him at CMC- Vijayapura, however, nothing was done. He submitted further representation on 24.03.2006 as well to respondent No.2, which was forwarded with Annexure-K by respondent No.2 to the Commissioner, CMC, Chintamani. Further notices were issued by respondent No.5 as evidenced by Annexure-M & Annexure-N stating that there is no document to show that the petitioner was working at CMC, Chintamani. It was thereafter that Annexure-P dated 27.11.2006 was submitted by the petitioner and writ petition was filed. 3. Learned Single Judge considered the contentions advanced and found that the petitioner, who was admittedly only a contract Junior Engineer engaged on daily wages, cannot have a right to contend that he is entitled to continue in service of respondent No.5 or to the service benefits for the period he was kept out of service. The respondents also have placed objections on record stating that the contract appointment of the appellant/petitioner had been terminated by giving public notice to him. It was found that the representation, which had no legal or statutory backing whatsoever, could not be directed to be considered. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that respondent No.5 had offered the appointment as Junior Engineer on daily wages to the petitioner by its resolution dated 30.11.1998 and the appellant was working in that capacity since then till 29.09.2004. It is contended that the orders of transfer as well as orders of cancellation of transfer were issued by the Government authorities and that strange stand taken by respondent No.5 that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had worked as daily wage Junior Engineer was clearly illegal and unjustifiable. The learned counsel also relies on Annexure-R3 report forwarded by respondent No.5 to the Director, Directorate of Municipal of Administration, in support of his contentions. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced on either side and in the light of the admitted fact that the appellant/petitioner had been engaged by respondent No.5 only by a resolution and without any public advertisement or after following any due procedure and, that too, only on daily wage basis as a contract employee, we cannot but agree with the finding of the learned Single Judge that the appellant did not have a right to insist that he should be reinstated in service of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15647-DB WA No. 275 of 2022 respondent No.5. This is more so, in view of the contention raised by respondent No.5 that his contractual service had also been terminated. In the said factual situation and in view of the judgment of the constitutional bench of the Apex Court in the case of SECRETARY, STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS VS. UMADEVI (3) AND OTHERS1, we are of the opinion that the directions as sought for in the writ petition could not have been granted. We therefore, find no good reasons to interfere in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. In view of the disposal of the appeal, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE BSR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3 1 (2006) 4 SCC 1