- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13749-DB WA No. 100574 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. WRIT APPEAL NO.100574 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY JNANA SANGAMA, BELAGAVI TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590018. REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BASAGOUDA PATIL S/O BHIMASHAPPA PATIL AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. CLASS IV EMPLOYEE VTU, BELAGAVI. R/O. RUSTUMPUR, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. 2. ASHOK HITTANAGI S/O SIDDAPPA HITTANAGI AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. CLASS IV EMPLOYEE VTU, BELAGAVI. R/O. BASAVANAGAR, KURANI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. 3. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, PRL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.09.2024 PASSED IN W.P. NO.104481/2022 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC. BHARATHI H M Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.10.18 12:17:46 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13749-DB WA No. 100574 of 2024 THIS WA COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) 1. Heard learned counsel Sri Anoop G. Deshpande for the appellant-University and learned counsel Smt. Gayatri S. R. for respondent Nos.1 and 2, as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No. 3. 2. Perused the entire appeal papers. 3. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 claims to be working in the appellant-University on a contract basis since 2009 and 2011, respectively. They approached this Court in W.P. No. 104481/2022, seeking quashing of the endorsement whereby their request for regularization was rejected. They also sought a direction to the appellant-University to absorb - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13749-DB WA No. 100574 of 2024 their services on par with other similarly situated employees of the University. 4. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the appellant-University as well as respondent Nos.1 and 2, passed the following order: 24. For aforesaid reasons, Writ petition is allowed in part, impugned endorsements dated 15.09.2021 at Annexure-K; and Annexure-K1 dated 16.09.2021, Issued by respondent no.2 rejecting request of petitioners claim for regularization/absorption as regular employees etc. are quashed. 25. VTU is directed to consider claim of petitioners for regularization/absorption as sought in representations dated 29.03.2016 and 16.05.2016 at Annexures-D and E afresh within period of three months from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. Learned counsel Sri Anoop G. Deshpande submits that the observations made by the learned Single Judge while issuing directions to consider the respondents' representations for regularization/absorption are in the nature of positive directions. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13749-DB WA No. 100574 of 2024 6. On going through the entire writ petition papers, we are of the considered view that the learned Single Judge has directed the appellant-University to consider the claim of the petitioners for regularization/absorption by considering their representations dated 29.03.2016 and 16.05.2016 (Annexures-D and E in the writ petition). 7. While disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has taken note of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court including the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi1. 8. The appellant-University cannot contend that it will not follow the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court if the facts of the present case attract the principles stated in the order of the learned Single Judge. The same shall be applied by the appellant-University while considering the representation. The learned Single Judge has noticed the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex 1 (2006) 4 SCC 1 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13749-DB WA No. 100574 of 2024 Court while disposing of the writ petition. However on going through the order of the learned single Judge, we are of the opinion that the learned single judge directed the appellant- University to consider the representation and there is no positive direction as contended by the appellant. 9. With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE AC, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 31