High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri. K C Kotuurappa S/O Late … vs State Of Karnataka on 26 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri. K C Kotuurappa S/O Late … vs State Of Karnataka on 26 October, 2010
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
 ~. {éy~si4i.°M._v JOIS, ADV.)

  STATE OF KARNATAKA

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA,  
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY': 91% ocT6fiER;'A'~£I2o;(a..: E'  
BEFORE'  2   A .  
THE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1c;:   O *

WRIT PETITION 1§IOS336()é~6G~3 01!' i_o_(S-REG)

BETVVEEN

1.

SR}. K C KOTUURAPPA. 5./0.3L-.A’rE ‘f3E*1ANNABASAPPA
AGED ”

KAD;~xt.A;~zIC:V1?’,’:*f.r1L1..,zI~;§3′:”;4t, K~1f’I*TANAKERE POST,
ARASIVKERE TALUK«S’.?3″ 11 7 ‘

.I-‘i-ASSAN DILa?R1C1″.._ ‘

2. é3R1′–D S R;AJASE:{EI§AF;APPA s/0 LATE
sr.r1V.-AL1Nr..;A1.%P.L\”–~ ”
Age’v;6IYEARs;.. I” ”

– .46 YE;ARSw. A
.. DUMMENAHALLI POST, ARASIKERE TALUK
‘ .r=.:».’7=.:3 “103 DISTRICT.

– –. PETITIONERS.

A REP BY ITS SECRETARY.

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE,
M S BUIDLING, BANGALORE 560 001

30

THE KARNATAKA STATE COIR DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LTD., BY ITS MANAGING

M

232

regularisation with all c0nseq_uential”‘”!:lenefi.ts_

service conditions in terms, 0’f=.’the._ “order:”>_cp1aii;ed

26.02.2010 Annexure–“J”:__”‘in vim:>.C:No.12o56:.j0,:.2009

modified by orders 1;;w.A.VN.e’C;jp1t4se(2010.

2. It is not in ld’i–ep:.1te._thejeetitioners were not
appointed in a regular
recruitmeiav lfieeruitment Rules of
the v2–H<i.. The petitioners'
"C basis cannot partake the
Character. I-fpegiilarl-~'C'appointment against permanent

v_aéan_e1es in "'ter.ms of a constitutional scheme and

' appointments in infraction of the rules

and in Violation of the provisions of the constitution, an

illeg*ali't:y,v cannot be regularised. The Apex Court in

.VST;{-\TE oz? MYSORE vs. s.v. NARAYANAPPAE and

lER.N. NANJUNDAPPA vs. T. THIMMIAH2, as approved

by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in

We

' AIR H967 SC 1071
3 (1972) 1 sec 409

-43

SECRETARY. STATE or KARNATAKA he

vs. UMADEVI (3) AND .o*mE1§sé’,ll4″th_ak£s<

regularisation is possible of arikact Whicia _W'..itl7|_.Ti'f1_. the

power of the authority and ..xf{?l1_ere there li3een"certajn' V

non–compliance of proee'du_:1*elorfimarirrcrrmthich does
not go to the root and that
regularisati:0I1::¢:V 'be a mode of
aproposition, would be
to of"a;3r)ointment in defiance of
the or effect of setting at naught the

rules. The Consstitt1tior1 Bench at Paragraph 53 directed

State A.GoVerr1fi'1ent or their instrumentalities to take

stepatol 1"egul1arise as a one time measure the services of

sa_;_ch_.5irregular1y appointed' and who have worked for

A ten zyselars or more in duly sanctioned posts but not

ll "under cover of orders of Courts or Tribunals.

3. In the instant case, the appointments are not

irregular, but illegal and Violative of rule of law and

1

-‘ (zem) 4 sec 1

:1″,

-3-

hence, petitioners are not entitled

direction at Paragraph of ‘

Constitution Bench. Ani’1exure’4’TJ”” ordef} the facts,

and circumstances of the c:«i’sei,’ has iioapplication to the
petitioner. ‘ ._ V V , _
Writ petitions being With’outii’n}e.rit.. are accordingly

rejected.