- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16854 WP No. 106998 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. 106998 OF 2016 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SHRI. SOMASHEKHAR V. LACHAMANNAVAR, S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCCU: SERVICE, R/AT: C/O S.S. PATIL, H.NO.7180 MAHANTH NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, DHARWAD – 580 006. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANDEESH H. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 030. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAKASH N. HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DATED 20.11.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16854 WP No. 106998 of 2016 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: I. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent to consider the Petitioner’s representation dated 20.11.2015 vide Annexure-A and take appropriate action in accordance with law; II. Grant such other relief or order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard Sri.Nandeesh H. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Prashant N. Hosamane, learned counsel for respondent. 3. The petitioner is stated to have been appointed as a Driver-cum-Conductor in the respondent-Corporation. Owing to his disability, he sought a change of cadre, which was granted. The petitioner thereafter submitted a representation requesting the respondent to fix the same pay scale that he was drawing prior to the change of cadre. The said representation having - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16854 WP No. 106998 of 2016 remained unattended has driven the petitioner to this Court in the present petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that, in the event the petitioner’s representation has not yet been considered, the same shall be examined within a reasonable time. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while considering the representation, the respondent shall also take into account the pay scale and the rights available to the petitioner under Section 47 of the Disabilities Act. 6. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition with a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. 7. If the petitioner’s representation has already been considered as on today, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail such remedy as is available in law, if he is aggrieved. If the representation has not been considered, the same shall be considered within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, as nearly 10 years have passed since its submission. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16854 WP No. 106998 of 2016 8. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE AC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 107