- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 105956 OF 2024 (S-REG) BETWEEN: NAGARAJ S/O. LATE NARAHARI RAO KULKARNI AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: X-RAY TECHNICIAN (CONTRACT BASIS) DEPARTMENT OF RADIOTHERAPY, VIMS, BALLARI, R/O. SAVI NILAYA, PLOT NO. 59, K.C.KONDIAH NAGAR, KOLAGAL ROAD, BALLARI-583104. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, M S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE GOVERNING COUNCIL REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VIJAYANAGARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583104. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Date: 2026.01.22 15:27:10 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 3. THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, BMC & RI OLD BUILDING, FORT, BANGALORE-560001. 4. THE DIRECTOR VIJAYANAGARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. J.M.ANILKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 (VC); NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER I.E. ANNEXURE- AL DATED 17.02.2024 TO REGULARIZE HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF X-RAY TECHNICIAN, UNTIL THEN IT IS REQUESTED TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS FROM HON’BLE COURT TO RESPONDENT NO. 4 INSTITUTE TO CONTINUE THE SERVICES OF PETITIONER AND MAINTAIN THE SAME AS STATUS-QUO AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who is working as an X-ray Technician on contract basis in Vijayanagara Institute of Medical Sciences (now Ballari Medical Science and Research Centre, Ballari), has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to regularize his services and to continue him in service till such regularization. Brief facts: 2. The petitioner was appointed pursuant to a walk- in-interview held on 05.09.2007 and was issued an appointment order dated 17.09.2007 on contract basis. Initially appointed as Radiotherapy/Radiology Technician, his post was subsequently re-designated as X-ray Technician by amendment dated 04.10.2007. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has continued in service from 2007 till date and has put in nearly 18 years of service. Several other contract employees appointed, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 pursuant to the same walk-in-interview were regularized in the year 2010. The petitioner made repeated representations seeking similar treatment and though his proposal was placed before the 51st Governing Council meeting dated 22.02.2024, the same was dropped. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the denial of regularization is arbitrary and discriminatory, especially when similarly situated employees were regularized. It is urged that the petitioner's appointment was against the vacant sanctioned post. That the petitioner has crossed the age limit for fresh appointment, warranting sympathetic consideration. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was purely appointed on contract basis, without following a regular recruitment process and that mere long service does not confer a right to regularization. It is admitted that the Governing Council - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 has already considered and dropped the proposal and thus the regularization cannot be ordered. 5. This Court has considered the rival contentions and perused the material. 6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was appointed on contractual basis. The law relating to regularization is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umadevi and Others1 (Umadevi), wherein it has been categorically held that the regularization of contractual or temporary employees is not a matter of right and can be exercised only as a one time measure subject to fulfillment of stringent conditions namely, whether the appointment was against the sanctioned vacant?, whether the appointment was made by the competent authority?, whether the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification on the date of appointment? and 1 (2006) 4 SCC 1 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 whether the petitioner has completed more than 10 years of continuous service without the benefit of any interim orders of any Court or Tribunal? 7. Mere continuous of service for long period or existence of vacancy does not create a vested or enforceable right to regularization, particularly, when the initial appointment was not made through regular, roster based recruitment process. 8. At the same time, the report discloses that the petitioner has put in years of service and that his claim has been repeatedly represented. This Court also notices that the impugned proceedings do not reflect any detailed consideration of the parameters laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Umadevi’s case. In particular, the impugned decision does not indicate the examination of whether the petitioner's engagement satisfied the conditions enumerated therein. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 claim for regularization, this Court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met by directing the competent authority to re-examine the petitioner's claim afresh, strictly in accordance with the principles laid down in Umadevi’s case and pass a reasoned order. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. The impugned proceedings dated 22.02.2024 (Annexure-AM) is hereby quashed. iii. Respondent No.2-Governing Council is directed to consider the claim for regularization strictly in accordance with the principles laid down in Umadevi’s case and pass a reasoned order. iv. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and decision taken shall be communicated to the petitioner. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:502 WP No. 105956 of 2024 v. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim. vi. All contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26