- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 7915 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI SHEKHAR S S/O LATE SUBBARAYADU AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.47/7, 2ND FLOOR, G 6TH STREET BEHIND ARALIKATTE GANESHA TEMPLE JOGUPALYA, HALASURU BENGALURU-560008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISH K., ADV.) AND: 1. KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001. 2. SRI PRASHANTH C S/O KOMAREPPA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO.7, PINJARI STREET, KUDATHINI VILLAGE, KODATHINI POST, BELLARI-583115. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. REUBEN JACOB, AAG A/W SRI. SHIVA PRABHU HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 SRI RAGHAVENDRA G GAYATHRI, ADV. FOR R2) Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE R1 PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED FINAL SELECT LIST (ANNEXURE-G) AND B) QUASH THE IMPUGNED FINAL SELECT LIST (UNDATED) IN SO FAR AS SELECTION OF THE R2 TO THE POST OF SWEEPER IS CONCERNED (ANNEXURE-G) AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R1 TO INCLUDE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE FINAL SELECT LIST PERTAINING TO SWEEPER (ANNEXURE-G) AND CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR APPOINTMENT AND APPOINT HIM TO THE SAID POST, IF HE IS OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE, WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER The petitioner, an unsuccessful candidate for the post of Sweeper in pursuance of the Notification dated 26.04.2022 (Annexure-C) is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the correctness and legality of Annexure-G/Select List of the cadre of Sweeper published on 27.03.2023 and for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Sweeper. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 2. The brief facts of the case are that: The first respondent-Karnataka Legislative Assembly Secretariat (for short “Secretariat”) under Notification dated 26.04.2022 (Annexure-C) invited applications from eligible candidates to fill up various posts including that of 2 posts of Sweeper. Out of two posts, one was reserved for Scheduled Caste category and one was reserved for General Merit. The petitioner being fully qualified applied for the post of Sweeper claiming reservation under Scheduled Caste category. It is stated that the selection and appointment to the post of Sweeper was by interview. The petitioner was called for interview and in the interview the petitioner had scored 18.50 marks whereas respondent No.2 scored 19 marks. Under Annexure-G/ Selection list of Sweeper along with other posts was published. The second respondent was selected against the post meant for General Merit category and one Sri.Tirupathi, who had scored 21.50 marks was selected against Scheduled Caste category. Questioning the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 method of selection and appointment, the petitioner is before this Court, with the prayer as stated above. 3. Heard learned counsel Sri.K.Sathish for petitioner, Sri.Reuben Jacob, learned Additional Advocate General along with Sri.Shivaprabhu Hiremath for respondent No.1 and Sri.Raghavendra G Gayathri, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 4. Learned counsel Sri.K.Sathish for petitioner would submit that the selection list published at Annexure-G and consequential order of appointment is totally contrary to the provisions of Karnataka Civil Services (Process of Selection of Candidates during Recruitment) Act, 2018 (for short “2018 Act”). Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner who has claimed Scheduled Caste category had scored 18.5 marks whereas respondent No.2 who is selected under General Merit has scored 19 marks whereas the person who is selected under Scheduled Caste category i.e., Sri.Tirupathi has scored 21.5 marks. Learned counsel would submit that taking note of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 merit, the said Sri.Tirupathi ought to have been selected against the vacancy meant for General Merit and whereas the petitioner ought to have been selected against the vacancy reserved for Scheduled Caste category. Learned counsel would submit that method adopted by the first respondent-Secretariat for preparing the selection list is wholly illegal and contrary to the provisions of 2018 Act. Learned counsel would submit that the respondents shall prepare a merit list irrespective of the caste, tribe and class and arrange them in the order of merit and thereafter, the second list shall be prepared to fill up the posts meant for General category and thereafter list of reserved category. It is his submission that in the instant case, without preparing merit list and without first selecting General Merit candidate, the first respondent straight away proceeded to first select the reserved category candidate. Further, he submits that there is denial of opportunity to reserved category candidates to participate in general category. Hence, he submits that - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 selection list at Annexure-G would not stand to reasons and is liable to be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General Sri.Reuben Jacob appearing for the first respondent would submit that in order to maintain vertical and horizontal roster points, since Sri.Tirupathi was the highest merit candidate, he was selected against Scheduled Caste category post and next highest in the merit is selected to General Merit post. Further, learned Additional Advocate General fairly submits that the procedure prescribed under 2018 Act is not followed while preparing the select list. 6. Learned counsel Sri.Raghavendra G Gayathri on behalf of respondent No.2 would submit that respondent No.2 is appointed on 27.03.2023 whereas the present writ petition is filed in March 2024, more than one year after the appointment of respondent No.2. Hence, there is delay and latches on the part of the petitioner in approaching the Court. The said delay in the matter of recruitment and appointment would be fatal. Learned - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 counsel would further submit that there is no misrepresentation or mistake on the part of respondent No.2 and as such, his appointment may be saved. Learned counsel would submit that respondent No.2 is more meritorious than the petitioner and as such, he submits that the appointment of respondent No.2 against General Merit post is proper and correct. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court in support of his contention that since there is no mistake or misrepresentation on the part of respondent No.2, his appointment is to be protected. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, the only point which falls for consideration is as to whether the select list of Sweepers at Annexure-G published on 27.03.2023 requires interference or not? - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 8. Answer to the above point would be in the affirmative and it requires interference at the hands of this Court, for the following reasons: The petitioner as well as respondent No.2 applied for the post of Sweeper in pursuance of Annexure-C/ Notification dated 26.04.2022. The petitioner applied claiming reservation under Scheduled Caste category whereas the second respondent applied claiming reservation under 2A category. The petitioner scored 18.5 marks whereas respondent No.2 scored 19 marks in the interview. One Sri.Tirupathi who is selected under Scheduled Caste category has scored 21.5 marks. 9. 2018 Act lays down the procedure as to how the list of eligible candidates has to be prepared for the purpose of competitive main examination, personality test and the manner of publication of final and additional list. Section (2) of 2018 Act lays down the procedure for select list and additional list. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 10. This Court while considering similar or identical question in W.P.No.14388/2023 and connected writ petitions (Aruna K.P V/S The State of Karnataka and others) by order dated 30.01.2025 at paragraph 10 has made the following observation: “2. Procedure of selection of candidates for competitive main examination, preliminary test, final select list and additional list:- Notwithstanding anything contained in any Act or rules made or deemed to have been made under the Karnataka State Civil Services Act, 1978 (Karnataka Act 14 of 1990) relating to method of recruitment and selection to any service or post under the State, every selection Authority shall,- (i) while preparing a list of eligible candidates in the ratio prescribed for competitive main examination; or (ii) while preparing a list of eligible candidates in the ratio prescribed for personality test; Prepare a list of eligible candidates in the ratio in which candidates are to be called for, in the following procedure, namely:- (a) The concerned selection Authority shall first prepare consolidated list of all eligible applicants irrespective of their caste, tribe, class and arrange them in the order of merit - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 without considering their caste, tribe or class belong to (hereinafter called the First List). (b) The selection Authority shall then prepare from out of the First List, a second list (hereinafter called the Second List) containing the names of applicants equal to the number of candidates required to be called for in the ratio prescribed in respect of posts to be filled up on the basis of general merit without considering their caste, tribe or class (i.e., the number of posts other than those reserved in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) arranging them in the order of merit commencing with the first name in the First List. (c) The selection Authority shall then prepare from out of the First List, excluding the portion forming the Second List, a third list (hereinafter called the Third List) containing the names of applicants belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other groups of Backward Classes equal to the number of candidates required to be called for in the ratio prescribed with reference to the posts reserved for each reserved category in the order of merit determined in the First List. (iii) while preparing a Final Selection list for appointment; and (iv) while preparing a Additional list. (a) The concerned selection Authority shall first prepare consolidated list of all eligible applicants irrespective of their caste, tribe, class and arrange them in the order of merit without - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 considering their caste, tribe or class belong to (hereinafter called the First List). (b) The selection Authority shall then prepare from out of the First List, a second list (hereinafter called the Second List) containing the names of applicants equal to the number of posts to be filled up on the basis of general merit without considering their caste, tribe or class (i.e., the number of posts other then those reserved in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes) arranging them in the order of merit commencing with the first name in the First List. (c) The selection Authority shall then prepare from out of the First List excluding the portion forming the Second List, a third List (hereinafter called the Third List) containing the names of applicants belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other groups of Backward Classes equal to the number of vacancies reserved for each reserved category in the order of merit determined in the First List. (d) The selection Authority shall then prepare a final list (which may called the Main List) of selected candidates for appointment to the category of posts for which selection is made by arranging the names of candidates included in the Second List and the Third List in the order of merit. (e) Where the Additional List has to be prepared in accordance with rules of recruitment, the Selecting Authority shall prepare the additional list by adopting the method mentioned at (a), (b), (c) and (d) above, from among the name excluding the names which are included in the Main list, from the first list. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 Provided that, despite providing concession of fees, age or other relaxation given to a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or other backward classes, he shall be considered as a general merit candidate on the basis of merit in every level of selection for competitive main examination, personality test, final selection list or additional selection list. The above provision lays down the procedure for preparing a list of eligible candidates in the ratio prescribed for competitive main examination or a list of eligible candidates in the ratio prescribed for personality test; and procedure for preparing final selection list for appointment. The concerned Selection Authority shall prepare a consolidated list of all eligible applicants irrespective of their caste, tribe, class and arrange them in the order of merit without considering their caste, tribe or class which would be First List. The Selection Authority shall then prepare from out of the first list, a second list containing the names of applicants equal to the number of candidates required to be filled up on the basis of general merit without considering their caste, tribe or class, arranging them in the order of merit commencing from the first name in the First List. Thereafter, the Selection Authority shall prepare from out of the First List, excluding the - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 portion forming the Second List, a Third List containing the names of applicants belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other groups of Backward Classes equal to the number of candidates required to be called for in the ratio prescribed with reference posts reserved for each reserved category in the order of merit determined in the First List. Then the selection Authority shall prepare a final list of selected candidates for appointment in the category of posts for which selection is made by arranging the names of candidates included in the second list and third list in the order of merit. In the instant case, the second respondent-Secretariat has given a go-by to the above stated procedure and it has adopted its own method or procedure which is contrary to the provisions of 2018 Act. The statement of objections and affidavit of the second respondent dated 30.01.2025 indicates that selection list was prepared first selecting reserved candidates and thereafter the general merit candidates, forgetting the fact that even reserved candidates could compete for the posts meant for general merit.” 11. The above observation of this Court would be squarely applicable to the present facts of the case also. In the instant case, the first respondent Selecting - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 Authority has selected the candidate for reserved category post at the first instance and thereafter has proceeded to select the candidate to fill up General Merit post. The procedure followed by the first respondent in preparing the select list is wholly illegal and contrary to the provisions of 2018 Act. The correct procedure for preparing the list is explained in the above stated order which shall have to be followed by the first respondent. Only after selecting candidates for the post meant for General Merit, the Selecting Authority shall proceed to select the persons against the reserved posts. 12. Learned counsel Sri.Raghavendra G Gayathri submitted that there is delay of one year on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court. The delay of one year in approaching this Court is explained by the petitioner stating that the interview had taken place on 07.02.2023 whereas the select list was approved on 27.03.2023 and on the same day, appointment orders were issued. Further it is submitted that thereafter on - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 18.04.2023 select list was uploaded for verification. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had made an application on 16.06.2023, requesting the first respondent to furnish the marks list and the said list was furnished to the petitioner on 27.06.2023 and on obtaining the said information, the petitioner is said to have filed application before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal on 10.11.2023. The said application was returned on 29.11.2023 for want of jurisdiction. Thereafter, it is submitted that the matter was entrusted to the present counsel by Legal Services Authority under letter dated 29.01.2024 and the writ petition was filed on 07.03.2024. When the sequence of events as stated above is looked into, there is no lapse on the part of the petitioner in approaching the Court. It cannot be said that there is delay or latches on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner was bonafide prosecuting the proceedings with the guidance of the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. Thus, I am of the view that there is no - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching or filing the present writ petition. 13. Learned counsel Sri.Raghavendra Gayathri lastly contended that since respondent No.2 is working for more than 2 years as on this date, appointment of respondent No.2 be protected. In support of the above submission, learned counsel for respondent No.2 places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in NARENDER SINGH v/s STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS reported in (2022) 2 SCC 286. Paragraph 23 of the said decision indicates that the said order was passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India by the Hon'ble Apex Court. 14. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 also places reliance on the decision of this Court in W.P.No.5206/2022 disposed of on 18.07.2023 (Sri.P.Venkataraghavan and others V/S The State of Karnataka and others) wherein the Division Bench of this Court protected - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 appointment of certain of the posts of Nurses under the State Government. A perusal of the said order would indicate that as there was sufficient number of sanctioned posts available and taking into account that the persons working in the Health Sector which is an area of critical need and necessity, this Court protected those appointments. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in (2010)10 SCC 707 in the case of GIRJESH SHRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS v/s STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court taking note of the fact that the appointed candidates cannot even be reverted to their earlier jobs in non-formal education centers, considered their request and directed the Authority to continue their services. Learned counsel for the second respondent also places reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.6454/2022 disposed of on 01.08.2023 (The Member Secretary, - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 Special Selection Committee and Chief Administrative Officer and another V/S Smt.Milana H.S. and another and also W.P.No.7772/2020 disposed of on 21.11.2024 (Sri.Shantharaju M V/S The State of Karnataka and others). Those decisions are also rendered in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the respondent therein was working for more than 13 years directed to be continued. In the above circumstances, the reliance placed on the above decisions by respondent No.2 would not assist his case. 16. Though there is no mistake or misrepresentation on the part of respondent No.2 while getting appointment, he is the beneficiary of illegal selection process. When a person is a beneficiary of illegality, he cannot or he would not possess any right to seek protection from the Court. 17. For the reasons recorded above, the following order: - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:4842 WP No. 7915 of 2024 (i) The writ petition is allowed. The select list at Annexure-G dated 27.03.2023 insofar as the post of Sweeper is quashed. (ii) The first respondent is directed to re-do the select list in terms of provisions of 2018 Act. (iii) Respondent No.2 and Sri.Tirupathi who are working as Sweeper shall not be disturbed, till the first respondent publishes the fresh final select list of Sweepers and if they fail to find place in the fresh select list be publish, they have no right to continue. (iv) Time for compliance: Two months from today. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19