- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1945 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. CHAMUNDESHWARI, W/O DILIPKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT MAHESHNAGAR, NEAR GUMPA, BIDAR-43 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BOLA VEDVYAS SHENOY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001 2. KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY P.B.NO.5074, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. C. YASHWANTH NAIK, S/O E. CHANDRA Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 AGED MAJOR 4. MANJUNATHAYYA LINGAYYA GURUVIN, S/O, LINGAIAH GURUVIN AGED MAJOR 5. SHARIF SAAB S/O SIKANDRABABA, AGED MAJOR 6. JAFFAR S/O CHANDPASHA AGED MAJOR 7. ASHA H. G., D/O GURUSIDDAPPA H. AGED MAJOR 8. VIJAYALAKSHMI D/O BASAPPA AGED MAJOR 9. MURTHY, S/O AMBAMMA AGED MAJOR 10. MANJUNATHA S/O ANJANEYA VATAPARAVI AGED MAJOR 11. SHIVALEELA W/O GUNAIAH HIREMATH AGED MAJOR 12. POOJA, W/O PAVAN KUMAR AGED MAJOR 13. JOOTHI, D/O ERAPPA NALATWAD, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 AGED MAJOR RESPONDENTS 3 TO 13 WORKING AS DALAYAT C/O KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001 14. KARNATAKA EXAMINATION AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560012 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKSHAY R HUDDAR FOR C/R11 AND 12 IN CP 17525/2026; SRI. N.K.RAMESH FOR R14; SRI. REUBEN JACOB, AAG ALONG WITH SRI. M.N.SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI .D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. SIRI RAJASHEKAR FOR R13) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER DATED 10.07.2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No.6333/2025 (S-RES) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW WP No.6333/2025 (S-RES), ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra-court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 10.07.2026 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.6333/2025 filed by the petitioner. 2. The appellant/petitioner had applied for appointment to the post of Dalayath (Attender) pursuant to the notification dated 26.04.2022 issued by the Karnataka State Legislative Assembly inviting applications for various posts, including the post of Dalayath (Attender). 3. The appellant/petitioner submitted her application along with the requisite documents. She initially claimed the benefit of reservation under Category III-B (Other Backward Classes). However, there was no - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 post reserved for candidates belonging to Category III-B. The appellant/petitioner had secured 37.5 marks on an average in the General Merit list. 4. The contention of the appellant/petitioner is that, in the absence of a post reserved for Category (III- B), her candidature ought to have been considered against the post reserved for General (Women). However, the upper age limit for candidates under the General (Women) was 35 years, whereas the appellant/petitioner had already crossed the age of 35 years as on the last date prescribed for submission of application. The further contention of the appellant/petitioner is that, if she could not be considered against the post meant for Category III- B, she should have been considered against the General category. This contention also cannot be accepted, as the upper age limit for candidates belonging to the General category was also 35 years. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010561312026 NC: 2026:KHC:54243-DB WA No. 1945 of 2026 5. The appellant/petitioner, having crossed the prescribed age limit, was therefore ineligible for consideration against the General category irrespective of securing higher marks. 6. In view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. SD/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE SD/- (H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN) JUDGE RKA CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10