- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10318 WP No. 63801 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 63801 OF 2016 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. PARIMALA.R. D/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.62/B, 2ND "C" MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, BAPUJINAGARA, MYSURU ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 026. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KALEEMULLAH SHARIFF, ADVOCATE) AND: THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, "JEEVAN JYOTHI", 1ST FLOOR, 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 038. …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 LIC TO APPOINT THE PETITIONER AS SUB-STAFF IN THE VARIOUS OFFICES IN WHICH THEY DEEM FIT AND FURTHER DIRECT THE SAID RESPONDENT NOT TO CONSIDER THE LIST ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN SENT TO IT BY THE R-2 FOR APPOINTMENT AS SUB-STAFF AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND ETC. Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10318 WP No. 63801 of 2016 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent to appoint her as a Sub- staff in any of its offices and to direct the respondent not to consider the list allegedly sent to it by the Employment Exchange for appointment. 2. The petitioner contends that she had registered her name with the Employment Exchange and had worked as a Typist/Assistant on temporary basis in the respondent from 19.07.1993 to 12.10.1993. She was purportedly removed from service without any reason. Thereafter, the respondent requested the Employment Exchange, Bengaluru to furnish a list of names for being appointed to Sub-staff posts. Though, the petitioner had applied and got registered with the Employment Exchange, Bengaluru, it did not include her name in the list of persons that was sent to the respondent. The petitioner contends that she had worked for more than 100 days with the respondent and that she was qualified to the post - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10318 WP No. 63801 of 2016 of Sub-staff. She therefore requested the respondent to accommodate her as a Sub-staff in any of its offices. The petitioner contends that the representations were not considered and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for a direction to the respondent to consider appointing her as a sub staff in any of its offices and not to act upon the list sent by the Employment Exchange, Bengaluru. 3. The petitioner was admittedly working from 19.07.1993 to 12.10.1993 in the respondent organization. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was employed by the respondent thereafter. If the respondent felt it necessary to secure the list of eligible employees in the Employment Exchange and if the petitioner was also registered with the Employment Exchange, the petitioner was bound to seek necessary directions to the Employment Exchange to include her name in the list that was sent to the respondent. The writ petition does not contain details as to the seniority of the petitioner and whether she was entitled to be referred to the respondent. Since the petitioner has no right to compel the respondent to appoint her as a Sub staff, no direction can be issued to the respondent. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10318 WP No. 63801 of 2016 4. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8