- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23688 WP No. 15875 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 15875 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT M SAVITHA W/O SHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS D NO.289/A A BLOCK INDUSTRIAL AREA SOG COLONY SRIRAMANAGAR DAVANAGERE-577005. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SOMASHEKHARAIAH R P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577002. 3. THE CHAIRMAN D DEVARAJ URS BACKWARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED KHANIJA BHAVAN DEVARAJ URS ROAD BENGALURU-560001. 4. THE DISTRICT MANAGER D DEVARAJ URS BACKWARD CLASSES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED BEERESHWARA HOSTEL BUILDING Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23688 WP No. 15875 of 2024 NEAR JAYADEVA CIRCLE HADADI ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577002 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B ESWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 & R2: SRI SHARANJITH SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER / ENDORSEMENT DTD. 17/08/2022 IN NO. fªÀåzÁ:zÉûAC¤:EvÀgÉ:¹Dgï:94:22-23 AND LETTER / ENDORSEMENT DTD. 08/08/2022 IN NO. zÉû¤/¹§âA¢/zÀÆgÀÄ/ ¹.Dgï/40/2019-20 ISSUED BY THE R3 AND 4 VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND P and etc. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B', THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the endorsement dated 17.08.2022 vide Annexure-N passed by respondent No.4, rejecting the request of the petitioner for considering her case for regularization. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as a Typist on daily wage basis from 2001. Later, she has been asked to work as a Computer Operator and worked till 01.11.2019. From 01.11.2019, she has not been allowed to work. Since the petitioner - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23688 WP No. 15875 of 2024 has worked more than ten years, she submitted a representation for regularization of her services. She submitted a representation dated 01.06.2021 vide Annexure-J to respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Since her representation was not considered, she approached this Court by filing W.P.No.19973/2021. This Court, by order dated 06.07.2022, passed the following order: “5. However, it would not be appropriate to enter into any such factual determination at this juncture in light of the observations made in W.P.No.1458/2020, suffice it to say the respondents are required to consider the representation at Annexure-H and J within a period of not later than three months from today.” 3. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 17.08.2022 vide Annexure-N has been issued. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was appointed as part-time temporary employee, she is not a daily wage employee and she has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23688 WP No. 15875 of 2024 not worked full time. Whenever there was more work, she has been engaged to work. Hence, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers. 6. Even though respondents contended that, the petitioner was appointed as part-time temporary employee and she is not a daily wage employee, in the impugned endorsement vide Annexure-N, there are no such contents forthcoming, no reason has been given in the impugned endorsement. The impugned endorsement is passed without application of mind. The representation submitted by the petitioner has not been considered properly. Hence, the same is liable to be set aside. 7. Accordingly, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned endorsement dated 17.8.2021 vide Annexure-N issued by respondent No.4 is quashed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23688 WP No. 15875 of 2024 (iii) The respondent No.4 is directed to re-consider the representation submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, after considering all the documents enclosed by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner is also permitted to submit additional representation, enclosing all the documents, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (v) The respondent No.4 is directed to consider the representation to be submitted by the petitioner and the documents produced by the petitioner, in accordance with law and pass suitable orders, as expeditiously as possible, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the additional representation. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50