- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9126 WP No. 5620 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 5620 OF 2013 (S-REG) BETWEEN: SRI.K. JAGANNATHA S/O SRI.K.BABU GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WATCHMAN, SHREE SUBRAMANYESWARA PRE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, SUBRAMANYA, SULLYA TALUK-574 238, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. I. GOPALA KRISHNA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNDER SECRETARY GOVERNMENT THE HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE -01. 2. THE COMMISSIONER THE HINDU RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS, K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 01. 3. THE DIRECTOR PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. 5. THE JOINT DIRECTOR Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9126 WP No. 5620 of 2013 PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MANGALORE-3, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. 6. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL K.G.I.D.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 7. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KUKKESHREE SUBRAMANYA TEMPLE, SUBHRAMANYA, SULLYA TALUK-574 238, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. 8. SHREE SUBHRAMANYESWARA PRE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE SUBHRAMANYA SULLYA TALUK-574 238, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.J.ESWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 TO R6, R7 AND R8 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REGULARIZE HIS SERVICE AS WATCHMAN IN HIS SERVICE WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, 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 respondents to regularize his service as watchman with all consequential benefits. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9126 WP No. 5620 of 2013 2. The petitioner contends that the respondent No.8 is a semi government aided pre-university College under the private management of the respondent No.7. The petitioner was appointed as a watchman by the respondent No.8 on 02.11.1990. He contends that from the date of his appointment, he was working as watchman without any break in service for more than 22 years. He was drawing minimum salary from the date of his appointment. The petitioner contends that he submitted several representations requesting the respondents to regularize his service as a watchman. The respondent No.2 by his letter dated 27.09.2007 sought a report from the respondent No.7 in that regard. The respondent No.8 forwarded the service report of the petitioner to the respondent No.5 with all attachments on 27.01.2012. 3. The petitioner contends that ever since then he was continuously requesting the respondents to approve his appointment and regularize his service. However, the respondents have not taken any action in that regard. In the meanwhile, he contends that an Attender who also was appointed on temporary basis was regularized and appointed - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9126 WP No. 5620 of 2013 on regular basis. Therefore, he contends that he is also entitled to be treated alike. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the petitioner is entitled for regularization of his services by approving his appointment. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate however submits that until the appointment of the petitioner is approved, the question of regularization of his services does not arise. However, he does not dispute the fact that based on a letter dated 27.09.2007 addressed by the respondent No.2 to the respondent No.7, the respondent No.8 has forwarded all the particulars of the petitioner to the respondent No.5. 6. We are living in a polity governed by a Constitution which is adopted by each and every citizen. A government is the creature of the Constitution meaning thereby that every official of the government is meant to serve the citizen to achieve the four fundamental rights set in stone in the preamble to the Constitution of India. If a citizen such as the petitioner has been ventilating his grievance, the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 being public servants have to come down from - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9126 WP No. 5620 of 2013 the high horse and verify whether the grievance is worthy of consideration. The least that they could do is to inform the petitioner about the consideration of his grievance so that he could escalate his case or give up on it. Therefore, a direction deserves to be issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. Consequently, the respondent Nos.3, 4, 5 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for approval and regularization of service of the petitioner. In the event of approval/regularization of his appointment, the petitioner shall be entitled for all consequential benefits. The respondent Nos.3, 4, 5 shall consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34