- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 19995 OF 2024 (S-PRO) BETWEEN: SRI NARAYANASWAMY M S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS WATER MEN, AVANI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MULABAGALU TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563127. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA SIMHA REDDY D.V., ADV. SRI. BASAVARAJA PATEL G.K., ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KOLAR ZILLA PANCHAYATH, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR DISTRICT-563127. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MULABAGALU TALUK PANCHAYATH, MULABAGALU, KOLAR DISTRICT-563127. 4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, AVANI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 MULABAGALU TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563127. 5. SRI. NAGARAJ . T S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT MAJOR PRESENTLY WORKING AS BILL COLLECTOR AVANI GRAMA PANCHAYATH MULABAGALU TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT- 563127. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 SRI M.S. DEVARAJ, ADV. FOR R2 TO R4 SRI SUBRAMANYA R., ADV. FOR R5) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 22.08.2022, 10.11.2022, 23.11.2022 AND 04.10.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, J, K AND L IN PURSUANCE OF THE OM DATED 14.09.2018 AND 16.04.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND G AND CONSIDER THE CASE OF PETITIONER FOR PROMOTION TO THE CADRE OF BILL COLLECTOR WITHOUT FURTHER LOSS OF TIME. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER The petitioner who is working as waterman in the 4th respondent-Panchayat is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a direction to consider his representations dated 22.08.2022, 10.11.2022, 23.11.2022 and 04.10.2023 to consider his case for promotion to the cadre of Bill Collector. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 2. Heard Sri.Vijaya Simha Reddy, learned counsel for Sri.Basavaraj Patel G.K., learned counsel for petitioner, learned counsel Sri.Subramanya for respondent No.5, learned counsel Sri.M.S.Devaraj for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Waterman in the 4th respondent-Panchayat since 2002. Learned counsel would submit that the next promotion to Waterman is the post of Bill Collector. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.5 was appointed as Bill Collector by which, the promotional opportunity of the petitioner is being denied. In that regard, learned counsel is said to have submitted representations dated 22.08.2022, 10.11.2022, 23.11.2022 and 04.10.2023 to consider his case for promotion to the post of Bill Collector. As the respondents failed to consider his representation, petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 4. Per contra, Sri.M.S.Devaraju appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that there is only one post of Bill Collector in the 4th respondent-Panchayat and the said post of Bill Collector is filled up by respondent No.5 under appointment order dated 18.09.2014 which is approved by second respondent on 03.08.2024. Learned counsel Sri.Devaraju would also submit that as on the date of appointment of respondent No.5 as Bill Collector, the petitioner was not eligible for promotion. Learned counsel also brings to the notice of this Court the Notification dated 29.09.2020, the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayat Raj (Staffing Pattern, Scale of Pay, Method of Recruitment and other conditions of Service of Employees of Grama Panchayat) Rules 2020 (for short “2020 Rules”) where method of recruitment is prescribed wherein it would state that the post of Bill Collector is to be filled up by promotion of Water Operator/Attendant/Cleaners on the basis of combined seniority list and for promotion the qualification prescribed is SSLC Examination or equivalent Examination with Kannada as one of the subject and must - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 have put in service of not less than five years in the cadre of Water Operator/Attendant/Cleaners. Further, he would submit that if there is no eligible persons for promotion, the Rule would provide direct recruitment. Thus, respondent No.5 was appointed by direct recruitment as Bill Collector. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 Sri.Subramanya would submit that respondent No.5 was appointed as Bill Collector in the year 2014 and working since then. He also submits that there is no challenge to his appointment at any point of time. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Heard 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 petitioner would be entitled for the prayer of mandamus?. 7. Answer to the above point would be in the negative and the petitioner would not be entitled for mandamus as prayed in the writ petition, for the following reasons: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 A person who seeks mandamus shall have to establish that he has legal right for consideration of his request and that the respondent has failed to consider his request. In the instant case, the petitioner has failed to establish his right for consideration of his case for promotion to the cadre of Bill Collector, for the reasons that there is no post of Bill Collector vacant in the 4th respondent-Panchayat. No doubt, the post of Bill Collector at the first instance is to be filled up by promotion and if there is no eligible candidate for promotion, then Panchayat could resort to direct recruitment. In the instant case, respondent No.5 is appointed as Bill Collector in the year 2014 and he is working for the last nearby 10 years. In the above circumstances, the petitioner would have no right to seek consideration of his representation. 8. It is seen that though the petitioner was appointed as Waterman in the year 2002 and respondent No.5 was appointed as Bill Collector in the year 2014, the petitioner - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3674 WP No. 19995 of 2024 failed to challenge the appointment of respondent No.5 for the post of Bill Collector. For the first time on 22.08.2022, the petitioner sought for promotion. As respondent No.5 is working as Bill Collector for last more than 10 years, it would not be expedient to disturb respondent No.5. As there is no vacancy of the post of Bill Collector as on the date of petitioner’s representation, the petitioner would not be entitled for consideration of his case for promotion as Bill Collector. 9. There is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51