- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15707 WP No. 104479 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 104479 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: MARUTI S/O. BHEEMANNA TIRLAKKANAVAR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: COMPUTER OPERATOR, NAGANUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, R/O. HANUMAPUR, TQ: MUNDAGOD, DIST: UTTARAKANNDA – 581 349. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D. M. KULKARNI AND SMT. VAIBHAVI INAMDHAR, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. ZILLA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, UTTARA KANNDA, KARWAR – 581 301, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 3. TALUK PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MUNDAGOD, UTTAR KANNDA, KARWAR – 581 301, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15707 WP No. 104479 of 2025 4. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PDO, NAGANUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, HANUMAPUR, TQ: MUNDAGOD, DIST: UTTARA KANNDA – 581 349. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2 & R3 ARE SERVED) 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 RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 18.03.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-T AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS. TO ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT/DIRECTION WHICH THIS HON BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15707 WP No. 104479 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer. A. To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 to 4 to consider the representation made by the Petitioner dtd. 18.03.2025 vide Annexure-T and pass appropriate orders. B. To issue any other Writ/direction which this Hon’ble court deems fit under the fact and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity 2. Heard the learned counsel Ms. Vaibhavi Inamdar appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. 3. The petitioner is said to have been appointed as a Computer Operator in the respondent No.4 Town Panchayath on temporary basis on 05.01.2016. It transpires that during the tenure of the petitioner, one Smt.Neelakshi files a writ petition in W.P. No.101169/2019 seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and appoint her to the post of clerk-cum-computer operator. The Panchayat is said to have recommended for approval of the petitioner's appointment and not Smt.Neelakshi. The writ petition which was filed by Smt.Neelakshi, as noted herein above comes to be allowed by directing the respondent to consider the representation - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15707 WP No. 104479 of 2025 submitted by said Smt.Neelakshi. The petitioner then claiming to be aggrieved and not being a party in the writ petition, prefers a Writ Appeal in W.A. No.100136/2022. The appeal comes to be disposed with the observation that the petitioner has to work out a remedy of filing appropriate petition and cannot maintain the appeal. The petitioner then files writ petition in W.P. No.101420/2022. Notice is issued. In the interregnum, the respondent No.2 passes an order approving the appointment of one Smt.Neelakshi. The petitioner again challenges the said action in W.P. No.101730/2022. The Co-ordinate Bench then disposes the writ petition directing consideration of the representation submitted by the respondent No.4 with regard to the approval of the appointment of the petitioner. A writ appeal then comes to be filed by Smt.Neelakshi challenging the said order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench as quoted supra. The petitioner then submits a representation in the teeth of the all the aforesaid facts seeking consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment to the additional post of Clerk cum Data Entry Operator. The said representation has not merited consideration. It is therefore the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15707 WP No. 104479 of 2025 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would reiterate the submissions as noted herein above and seeks a direction for consideration of the representation. 5. The respondent Nos.2 to 4 though served have remained unrepresented. 6. The learned HCGP would submit that if reasonable time is granted, the respondents would consider the representation and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. 7. In the light of the aforesaid circumstance, I deem it appropriate to dispose the subject petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation and direction to respondent Nos.2 to 4 and redress the grievance of the petitioner, in accordance with law, at any rate within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RSH/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 278