- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16813 WP No. 102239 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 102239 OF 2016 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KHAJA BANDE NAWAZ, S/O. ALLAH BAKSHI.B(LATE), AGE: 40 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. 2. SHRI. K.N.ARUN KUMAR, S/O. LATE NARAHARI RAO KULKARNI, AGE: 41 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. 3. SMT. A. PADMALATHA, W/O. P.VIJAYA BHASKAR, AGE: 45 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. 4. SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANA.K, S/O. VENKATESH K., AGE: 45 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. 5. SRI. ANIL KUMAR.K, S/O. K.NAGARAJ RAO, AGE: 41 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. 6. SMT. TIPPAMMA D/O. ERANNA (LATE) AGE: 50 YEARS, WORKING AS A FDA, MEDICAL COLLEGE, VIMS, BALLARI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT (MEDICAL EDUCATION), Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16813 WP No. 102239 of 2016 VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 2. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 3. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU. 4. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH and FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU. 5. COMMISSIONER, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH and FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU. 6. DIRECTOR, VIJAYANAGAR INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, BALLARI. 7. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, VIJAYANAGAR INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, BALLARI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. J.M.ANILKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R6; R7 – SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.6 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONERS DATED 10.06.2014, 27.09.2014 AND 04.02.2016, VIDE ANNEXURES-E, E1 AND E2 TO PROMOTE THEM TO THE POST OF OFFICE SUPERINTENDENTS RETROSPECTIVELY IN THE RESPONDENT NO.6 AND 7 INSTITUTE AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.4 NOT TO DEPUTE THE OFFICE SUPERINTENDENTS OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICE DURING COUNSELING THROUGH PROMOTION OR DEPUTATION TO VIMS, BALLARI (RESPONDENT NO.6) AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16813 WP No. 102239 of 2016 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer: “A. Issue a writ or mandamus directing Respondent No.6 to consider the representation of petitioners dated 10.06.2014, 27.09.2014 and 04.02.2016, vide Annexures-E, E1 and E2 to promote them to the post of Office Superintendents retrospectively in the Respondent no.6 and 7 institute and consequently direct the Respondent no.4 not to depute the office superintendents of health and family welfare service during counseling through promotion or deputation to VIMS, Ballari (Respondent No.6). B. Such other writ or order as deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Sri. T.Hanumareddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Sri.J.M.Anilkumar, learned counsel for respondent No.6. 3. The petitioners were appointed in respondent Nos.6 and 7–Institutes as Second Division Assistants. They were subsequently promoted as First Division Assistants on their respective dates. The petitioners thereafter submitted - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16813 WP No. 102239 of 2016 representations seeking promotion to the cadre of Office Superintendents on the basis of their seniority and alleged entitlement. As the respondents have not considered their representations, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. Learned counsel Sri J.M. Anilkumar, appearing for respondent Nos.6 and 7, submits that if reasonable time is granted, the representations of the petitioners will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law. 5. In light of the above submission, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and pass necessary orders in accordance with law, within an outer limit of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not earlier and if not already done. 6. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE AC/CT-ASC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 95