- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 21923 OF 2021 (S-RES) BETWEEN: S M PREMKUMAR S/O NAGARAJU @ NAGAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS WORKING AS GRAMA SAHAYAK (NOW NOT IN SERVICE) KASABA HOBLI, SHANKARADEVARAPET BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT R/AT SHANKARADEVARA PETE BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DSITRICT-573115. …PETITIONER (BY MISS JAHNVI M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY PRL SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING BENGLAURU 560001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAKALESHPUR DIVISION BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573115. 3. THE TAHSILDAR BELUR TALUK, HASSAN-573115. 4. SRI K R ANANTHARAM S/O RUDRESH WORKING AS GRAMA SAHAYAK Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 KASABA HOBLI OFFICE OF THE REVENUE INSPECTOR KASABA HOBLI, BELUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT, R/O HOLLEBEEDHI BELUR TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT-573115 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3: R4 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO- QUASH THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2019 ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE R3 NOTIFICATION BY R3 DATED 13.10.2020 ANNEXURE-E AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO:GRA.SA.SIBBANDI 60/2020-21 DATED 29.11.2020 ANNEXURE-F ISSUED BY THE R3 AS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID 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 order dated 15.10.2019 vide Annexure-B, passed by the third respondent, whereby the petitioner has been terminated from the service of Grama Sahayak. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Grama Sahayak on 01.10.2013 (Annexure-A) on temporary basis. By order dated 15.07.2019, the term was further extended - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 for a period of six months. From 01.10.2013 till the impugned order Annexure-B was passed, the petitioner was working as a Grama Sahayak on a temporary basis. Without giving any notice and without conducting any enquiry, the impugned order has been passed and the petitioner has been terminated from service on 15.10.2019. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, before competition of his term, without giving any notice and without conducting any enquiry, the impugned order was passed on certain allegations. The impugned order of termination is stigmatic. Therefore, she contended that personal hearing has to be granted to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. No personal hearing was granted and no notice has been issued. Hence, it is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the impugned order has to be quashed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 4. The learned counsel further submits that, the petitioner has been terminated from service. Subsequently, the respondents called application to the post of Grama Sahayak and the petitioner had also applied for the same. Without considering the case of the petitioner, the fourth respondent has been appointed. Hence, she sought for allowing the writ petition. 5. The learned AGA for the State submits that the petitioner has been appointed on 15.07.2019 for a period of six months. He has been appointed on temporary basis with certain conditions. Since he was irregular to the work, he has been removed from the service. The impugned order does not amount to any stigma on the petitioner. He further submits that on the earlier occasion also, warning was given to the petitioner when he was absent from the duty. Since, repeatedly he was absent to the duty, the impugned order has been passed, there is no error or illegality in the order. Since the petitioner was terminated from service, his case was not considered for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 re-appointment. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Grama Sahayak by order dated 01.10.2013 as temporary employee. From 2013, petitioner’s service was continued till 15.07.2019. On 15.07.2019, one more appointment order has been issued continuing the service of the petitioner for a further period of six months. During that period, on the allegation that the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent to duty and his work was not satisfactory, the impugned order has been passed, he was relieved from the service. The impugned order is passed without giving any notice to the petitioner and it is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Since the impugned order of termination is stigmatic, before passing the impugned order, the petitioner has to be heard personally. No such procedure has been followed. On this - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28342 WP No. 21923 of 2021 short ground, the impugned order requires to be quashed. Since the petitioner’s term of six months is already over, now there cannot be any direction to re-instate the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is allowed in part. (ii) The order dated 15.10.2019 (Annexure-B) is quashed. (iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents to pass appropriate orders after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 42