- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 15767 OF 2022 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI YOGESH NAIK K R S/O RUPLA NAIK AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS WORKING AS DRIVER OFFICE OF MALENAADU AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD SHIMOGA-577201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJA PATEL G K.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION & STATISTICS M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE MALENAADU AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD REP BY ITS SECRETARY SAAGARA ROAD, SHIMOGA-577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER, ADVOCATE FOR R1: R2 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS RELATING TO THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO.YO E 27 MAPRAMAM/2018 DATED 10.08.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q PASSED BY THE R1, PERUSE AND QUASH THE SAME AS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION AND SO FAR AS THE NON-CONSIDERATION OF THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER W.E.F. 01.01.2005 ON WHICH DATE HE COMPLETED 10 YEARS OF SERVICE AS PER THE JUDGEMENT IN UMADEVIS CASE AND EXTEND TO HIM ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS OF PAY, INCREMENT, PENSION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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 10.08.2021 vide Annexure-Q passed by the first respondent, whereby his request for regularization to the post of driver in the second respondent – Board is rejected. 2. The petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis as a driver under the second respondent. His appointment was initially made on 01.01.1995 by the Secretary of the second respondent – Board and approved on 29.04.1995. The Secretary of the Board recommended for regularization of the appointment of the petitioner, by - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 letter dated 28.02.2002 vide Annexure-C. On 25.11.2006, the Secretary of the Board sent a proposal to the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga, recommending the name of the petitioner for regularization vide Annexure-D. On 30.12.2006 vide Annexure-E, the Secretary also sent the recommendation to the Government recommending the name of the petitioner for regularization and it is very clearly mentioned that he has satisfied all four conditions mentioned in the case of STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS vs. UMA DEVI & OTHERS reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1. Since the said recommendation is not considered, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.11151/2008. This Court, by order dated 22.08.2008, directed the first respondent – State Government to consider the representation of the petitioner for regularization. Thereafter, a cryptic endorsement has been issued vide Annexure-J dated 16.07.2012 rejecting the case of the petitioner. That has been challenged before this Court in W.P.No.21821/2013. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 This Court on 12.07.2016 directed the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Thereafter, again, by endorsement dated 01.04.2017 vide Annexure-L, the request of the petitioner for regularization has been rejected. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed one more writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.11380/2018. This Court, by order dated 22.01.2020 disposed of the said writ petition, directing to respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization. That order has been challenged by the State Government before a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.640/2020. A Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 04.06.2021 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Thereafter, the impugned endorsement has been issued rejecting the request of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the Secretary of the second respondent – Board has recommended the name of the petitioner for regularization stating that the petitioner has complied all the four conditions as referred in UMA DEVI’s case. Contrary to the recommendation, the Government has rejected the request earlier only on the ground that the service of the petitioner has been continued on the basis of the interim order passed by this Court. This Court in W.P.No.21821/2013 has given a clear finding that the service of the petitioner has been continued because of the need and not on the basis of the interim order. Therefore, now, the respondent cannot reject the recommendation on the ground that there was continuity of service only on the basis of the interim order. Inspite of that, the impugned endorsement has been passed which is contrary to the directions of this Court. Hence, sought for allowing the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 4. Per contra, the learned AGA appearing for the respondent – State has contended that as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of UMA DEVI, if the daily wage employee, whose service has been continued on the basis of the interim order passed by the court, that period cannot be considered for regularization of the service that he has completed ten years of service. The case of the petitioner is that his service has been continued on the basis of the interim order granted by the High Court in W.P.No.8192/1990 dated 11.04.1990 and 23.04.1993. In view of the interim order, the petitioner’s service has been continued. Hence, he has not complied with the fourth condition of UMA DEVI’s case. Therefore, his service has not been regularized. Hence, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis as a driver under the second - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 respondent – Board. His appointment was initially made on 01.01.1995 by the Secretary of the second respondent – Board and the same was approved by the Board as per the decision of the Board on 29.04.1995. The second respondent – Board even has recommended the name of the petitioner to the Government for regularization as per Annexure-E dated 30.12.2006. In the earlier round of litigation, the case of the petitioner for regularization has been rejected on the very same ground that service of the petitioner has been continued on the basis of the interim order granted by the High Court in W.P.No.8192/1990. This Court, in W.P.No.21821/2013 disposed of on 12.07.2016 has categorically given a finding that the second respondent, who is the employer of the petitioner has continued the service of the petitioner because of the need. The relevant portion which is at paragraph No.4 is extracted below: “4. In Umadevi’s case, at paragraph 53 of the judgment, it is clearly stated that in case where duly qualified persons were appointed in sanctioned - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 vacant post and continued to work for more than 10 years without intervention of the orders of the Court, question of regularization of their services has to be considered on merits based on the principles laid down in the judgment. In such circumstances, in my view, the State Government has erred in rejecting the request made by the petitioner on the ground that his services were continued because of the interim order obtained. 2nd respondent who is the employer of the petitioner has continued the services of the petitioner because of the need.” 7. Thereafter, again, by endorsement dated 01.04.2017 vide Annexure-L request of the petitioner for regularization has been considered under the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 and rejected. Being aggrieved by the same, he has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11380/2018. This Court, by order dated 22.01.2020 has held that the petitioner was working as a driver continuously for a period of more than 10 years in a sanctioned vacant post. The petitioner’s case cannot be rejected on the ground that his service has been continued on the basis of the interim order passed by this Court in - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 W.P.No.8192/1990. In W.P.No.11380/2018, it is held that the petitioner is legally entitled for regularization in terms of UMA DEVI’s case and quashed Annexure-L. The respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner, expeditiously, not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Being aggrieved by the order, State has filed a writ appeal in W.A.No.640/2020. The writ appeal was dismissed by order dated 04.06.2021 and the order of the learned Single Judge has been affirmed directing the respondent – State Government to reconsider the matter within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. Thereafter, the impugned endorsement has been issued on the very same ground that the service of the petitioner has been continued on the basis of the interim order passed in W.P.No.8192/1990. This Court, in the earlier proceedings, in W.P.No.21821/2013 disposed of on 12.07.2016 has categorically held that the State Government has erred in rejecting the request of the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 petitioner on the ground that his services were continued because of the interim order obtained. In fact, the second respondent who is the employer of the petitioner has continued the service of the petitioner because of the need and the post is a sanctioned vacant post. In the subsequent judgment of this Court in W.P.No.11380/2018 disposed of on 22.01.2020 this Court has also given a categorical finding that the petitioner was working as a driver continuously for a period of more than ten years in the sanctioned vacant post. 8. In such circumstances, in the light of the discussions made in W.P.No.21821/2013 disposed of on 12.07.2016 and W.P.No.11380/2018 disposed of on 22.01.2020, which is affirmed in W.A.No.640/2020 disposed of on 04.06.2021, the case of the petitioner has to be considered for regularization. Inspite of that, the respondent has again issued the impugned endorsement on the very same ground that the service of the petitioner has been continued on the basis of the interim order - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.8192/1990. The order passed in W.P.No.11380/2018 has attained finality since a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.640/2020 confirmed the order passed in W.P.No.11380/2018 and the same has not been challenged before the Apex Court. However, this Court has given a categorical finding that the service of the petitioner has not been continued on the basis of the interim order, but the employer has continued the service of the petitioner because of the need. Now, that the respondents cannot, on the very same ground pass the impugned endorsement. Hence, the same is unsustainable and requires to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The endorsement dated 10.08.2021 vide Annexure-Q passed by the first respondent is set aside. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19513 WP No. 15767 of 2022 (iii) The respondents are directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in the light of the observations made by this Court in W.P.No.21821/2013 disposed of on 12.07.2016 and W.P.No.11380/2018 disposed of on 22.01.2020 and UMA DEVI’s case, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50