- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1399 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR - MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., (MESCOM) (GOVT.OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING) CORPORATE OFFICE, PARADIGM PLAZA, A.B.SHETTY CIRCLE, MANGALORE-575001. REPRESENETD BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER SRI MURALIDHARA NAYAK. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (A AND HRD) MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., (MESCOM) CORPORATE OFFICE, PARADIGM PLAZA, A.B.SHETTY CIRCLE, MANGALORE-575001. REP BY CHIEF MANAGER ( A AND HRD) SRI B S MANJUNATH SWAMY. 3. THE ASST. GENERAL MANAGER (ESTABLISHMENT), CORPORATE OFFICE, PARADIGM PLAZA, A.B.SHETTY CIRCLE, MANGALORE-575001. A B SHETTY CIRCLE MANGALORE 575001 Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 REP BY ASST GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL SRI VASANTHA SHETTY. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B C PRABHAKARA, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI J S SRIDHARA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS S/O SATHYANARAYANA SHETTY NO 179, LAKSHMIPURA BADAVANE JAVAGAL AT AND POST ARSIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573121. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT-SERVED) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.03.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No.644/2019 (S-RES) AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) This appeal has been instituted against the judgment and order dated 25th March 2025, passed by the Writ Court in Writ Petition No.644/2019 instituted by the respondent. 2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Writ Court, for the sake of convenience. 3. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are as under: 4. The petitioner filed the writ petition challenging the endorsement dated 26.09.2018, issued by the Assistant General Manager (Establishment), Corporate Office of Mangaluru Electricity Supply Company Ltd., Government of Karnataka undertaking. By the impugned endorsement, the petitioner's application for the post of Junior Assistant was rejected on the ground that he did not produce certificate of pass in Pre-University Course (for short, `PUC'). The petitioner had sought for a writ in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 the nature of mandamus to the respondents to reconsider his case for selection to the post of Junior Assistant under 2A Rural Category in terms of the Circulars dated 27.01.2015 and 27.02.2018 issued by the State Government. 5. The appellant has framed its own Regulations which are called "Mangaluru Electricity Supply Company Recruitment Regulations, 2002", which prescribes the qualification for the post of Junior Assistant as under : " Minimum qualification :- should have PUC qualification or passed equivalent Examination or Diploma in Accountancy and Auditing or in Accountancy and costing awarded by the State Council of Vocational Education, Government of Karnataka." 6. From the perusal of the Regulations prescribing minimum qualification for the post of Junior Assistant, it is evident that all qualifications prescribed are disjunctive and therefore, any of the qualification possessed by the candidate would entitle him for applying to the post of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 Junior Assistant. If a person does not have PUC qualification, but, he has passed equivalent examination with that of PUC, he would also be entitled to make application for the post of Junior Assistant. 7. Admittedly, the appellant has not prescribed any equivalent qualification to the PUC. However, the State Government has issued a Circular dated 27.01.2015 i.e., prior to the recruitment Notification dated 08.01.2016 and treated SSLC with 3 years Diploma Course as equivalent course in PUC. 8. The petitioner had applied for the post of Junior Assistant in pursuance to the Notification dated 08.01.2016 and his name found place in the select list. The petitioner is havingheld following qualifications to his credit i.e., SSLC certificate and Diploma in Automobile Engineering. The petitioner's candidature after he got selected was cancelled on the ground that the petitioner did not have PUC qualification, which is the essential qualification for the post of Junior Assistant. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 9. The learned Single Judge taking note of the Circular dated 27.01.2015 has held that, when the appellant has not prescribed an equivalent qualification for PUC, one has to act upon the State Government Circulars which provides for equivalent qualification for PUC. 10. When the petitioner had the requisite qualification as prescribed under the Recruitment Regulations mentioned above, i.e., SSLC and 3 years Diploma in Automobile Engineering, which has been treated as equivalent to PUC by the State Government, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the endorsement dated 26.09.2018 issued by the Assistant General Manager (Establishment), Corporate Office of the appellant. 11. We see no reason to interfere in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, inasmuch as, the State Government itself has prescribed the equivalent qualification to PUC vide its Circular dated 27.01.2015 and it is not the case of the appellant that - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21276-DB WA No. 1399 of 2025 it has prescribed separate equivalent qualification to PUC. When the appellant has not prescribed any equivalent qualification to PUC, one has to consider the relevant Circular issued by the State Government prescribing equivalent qualification to PUC. 12. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal stands dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending I.As., if any, does not survive for consideration and the same are disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE BK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15