- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 28464 OF 2023 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI M NINGARAJU S/O LATE MADAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS DRIVER (DAILY WAGE WORKER) OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CONSERVATIVE OF FOREST SOCIAL FORESTRY, MANDYA DIVISION MANDYA 571402. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJA PATEL G K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS GOVT OF KARNATAKA 18TH CROSS, ARANYA BHAVAN MALLESHWARAM,BENGALURU 560003. 3. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS GOVT OF KARNATAKA 18TH CROSS, ARANYA BHAVAN ASHOKAPURAM, MYSORE 570018. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SOCIAL FORESTRY RANGE MANDYA 571401. 5. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER SOCIAL FORESTRY RANGE, PANDAVAPURA MANDYA DISTRICT 571402. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER, AGA FOR R1 TO R5) 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 ORDER BEARING NO.A1/C/CR-19/WP- 15801/2022-23, DATED: 31.10.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-J PASSED BY THE R4, PERUSE AND QUASH THE SAME AS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16(1) 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 31.10.2023 issued by respondent No.4, vide Annexure-J. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is working as a driver in the Forest Department on daily - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 wage basis from 01.03.1995 till today. The Governnment issued a Gazette Notification dated 15.02.2013 for publication of Act No.19/2013 of the Karnataka Daily wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 for regularization of daily wage employees. After the coming into force of Act No.19/2013, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 01.02.2019 to the fourth respondent herein - Deputy Conservator of Forests, Social Forestry Range, Mandya vide Annexure-C for regularization. Pursuant to the said representation, the fourth respondent herein, by letter dated 10.06.2019 recommended the petitioner’s name for regularization under Act No.19/2013, vide Annexure-D. Since his case was not considered, he approached this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.15801/2022. This Court, by order dated 26.06.2023 disposed of the said writ petition permitting the petitioner to file a representation along with relevant documents to respondent No.4 within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the said order and directed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 the respondent No.4 to consider the same within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 31.10.2023 vide Annexure-J has been issued rejecting the request of the petitioner for regularization of his services. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, vide Annexure-J dated 31.10.2023 the representation of the petitioner for regularization has been rejected on the ground that no documents have been furnished to show that he has completed ten years of service as daily wage employee in the Forest Department as on 10th April 2006. In fact, he has furnished all the relevant documents and recommendation also made by the fourth respondent. Without considering all these aspects of the matter, the impugned endorsement has been issued. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 4. Per contra, the learned AGA appearing for the State has contended that the petitioner has not produced any document to show that he was continuously working for a period of ten years as on 10th April 2006. Since the petitioner is not covered under Act No.19/2013, his case has been rightly rejected by issuing the impugned endorsement. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. 6. The specific case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a daily wage employee in the Forest Department as a driver. He was working from 01.03.1995 till today. To that effect, he has produced Annexure-A issued by the fourth respondent. The Government has passed Act No.19/2013 for regularization of daily wage employees. The same is produced as Annexure-B. Under the said Act, Section 2A defines the ‘daily wage employee’ as a person who has continuously worked for ten years as - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 on 10th April 2006 as a daily wage employee. In this regard, the petitioner produced Annexure-A statement issued by the fourth respondent which discloses that the petitioner is working on daily wage basis as a driver in the Forest Department from 01.03.1995. He has also produced the recommendation letter issued by the fourth respondent to the third respondent dated 10.06.2019 stating that the petitioner is working as daily wage employee continuously from 01.03.1995 to 20.09.2006 and recommended that his case be considered for regularization under Act No.19/2013. But, the impugned endorsement – Annexure-J is issued stating that no documents have been produced to show that the petitioner has completed ten years of service as per Section 2A of Act No.19/2013. The impugned endorsement has been issued without considering the documents produced by the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 7. Accordingly, the following order is passed: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18866 WP No. 28464 of 2023 (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 31.10.2023 issued by the fourth respondent vide Annexure-J is quashed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh additional representation to the fourth respondent enclosing all the relevant documents, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the fourth respondent is directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner, taking into consideration the documents to be submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, not later than three months from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 52