High Court Karnataka High Court

M Chandrakala vs Government Of Karnataka on 12 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M Chandrakala vs Government Of Karnataka on 12 August, 2009
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Malimath
-D ;-J  

IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12*" DAY OF AUGUST, 2009

PRESENT

THE HON'Bi.E MR.JUSTICE K.L.MAND.3:13N¢:t1fr%éDC'%  *

AND.  

THE HOIWBLE MR.3usTzkr§  

WRIT APPEAL Nc:..553 €}F_f_;g;{"1(_)_§_3_L$_3;j'~_4;;E_S_)_. jg "

BETWEEN :

1.

am CHA¥¢DRAi{AU9§ _
D/O MDN1’Di\!?PA,””TVD.__ _
AGED ABDW—..2–5 ‘fE,A§'{S
‘RENii_KA VEENA “ru:.1LAYA’

. – –5<ARAHALL1Rofi;-D

BAi\iGARi3ET+:S63 114.

.V 3 N’ D.D*mLA
” 539% B FNARAYANAPPA

A” ” AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

EHQTRENAHALLI VILLAGE
MALLUR POST
SISLAGHATTA.

% * -D3} M SURE$i-i KUMAR

§/O MUNISWAMY
AGEE3 ABQUT 32 YEARS
530.8, “YESU f\¥ILAYA”

KADHRIPURA VILLAGE

KOLAR~563 101.

. D M VENKATESHAPPA

S/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

BODDA DASENAHALLI v1Lp;AGE’~

KADALAC-BURKE POST
SHIELAGHATTA TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA 9:s*:gIc’fp

. M P GANESH BABU

SIG M PXLLAPPAJ

AGED ABOUT zsmaarts ”

MARJENAHALLI VILLAGE”

KAMADe:~:;c.HALL.H=c>sT

KOLAP.§e3’s.~.x§’_’101§,_

. GEM’t}V( ZE§;ii*{VfI55;£!€:

AGEE3».AE<;i!JVT 35()"\s?:E:5:R$. '
vS'r'i"." we r: i<A1t*a:-;:3H'»=.;ARA NILAYA

:':CHA£*iAP'FA»..BUIL'mi'~iC5 %

CfriIKKABIDA;?A'KALLU..-
NA{;ASANV£3¥U'«h PQS T.

,;’ “M,suSHmA’
” ASEQ ABom*«25 YEARS

‘;:.’jrY§E;f 21?

T’ _ Egrv:s;m A::;AR CGLONY
%. 553 115.

§’i”§’iA§iiGALAM8A
»D;'{> K M MUNIYAPPA

ASED ABQUT 27 YEARS

AA JAGAJEEVANAPALYA
= SRINIVAS?URATALUK.

9. K VIJAYA KUMAR
S/O KRISHNAPPA
AGES ABOUT 30 YEARS
SHILLANGERE U & P
KOLAR TALUK
KOLAR-563 101.

10. RAMESH SIDRAMAWA Gfl;\.’A:§3:;”£_.

5/0 SIDRAMAPPA GAwaaI ‘
AGED ABOUT 37 YEA”r’iS”»
R/AT MOHAMADAPURA”¥~’AL%J_K
BIJAPUR DzsTa;cT..%A’ ‘

11. V RADHAKRISHNAN
S/G VENKATESH

AGE? AiB,€3UT;:3O gvmas-%’ u A

No4,.354,%2″,_%.k%1sT« gzaoss if; V
s=>;;Ls;:a;:»s om LA’2’f%;)L¥’T..
% %1§QL;§R»5;§3 :01 ~

12. PADMAvA1*fHArsmA’%”~’.%« ‘- ” ‘V

W0 8 NARAYANAPPAV
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS .– ”

HOUSE NO.146,,”~ ”

35+-ma ;3H’A5HEER SHAMZL.

.. ….. .. ”

EAGEP.-.’~i_,LLT. ‘Tc; wN«.._
KQLAR5

V K DEVARAJU _’ . ‘

sic: xo’i3IRza;»m’

‘=__AGED Asot;T«;.29 YEARS

S.K..”‘r£AL{‘.§_« POST
cHmTAi~iA:~:1 TALUK

V” £,’H’1i<k:ABALLAPuiz ms"m<:'r.

14.

15.

15.

172%

M ” cHIT:u5’ouRGA-577 541.

{By’L:;ré aQwmAMDsv C ULLAL, ADVOCATE)

SHARANAPPA

s/0 BHAGANNA
QHANEGUNDI

maexax TALUK
GULBARGA–575 202.

S K BHAGYAMMA

w/0 KRISHNAPPA A
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS
MARJENAHALLI v1L1A€;E%–%.
MADDERI POST
Roma-563 191.,

A PREMAVATHI % =
D/O S.HANJE?iA»YAwPPA« r
AGE:!D’;~?gBC)UT;_27§YEARS’ Vk ‘
C.B.”PUF;;A.RGAi)’:._ g
i§A’—,_
AGE33 figscséfl SGVYEARS
CF:~1TRAi”fiJRGA~TALUK

. . .APPEi.LANTS

GOWRNMENT 0:: KARNATAKA

” DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND

“MNCHAYATRAJ

M.S.BUILDIf\iG, DR. AMEEDKAR RGAD
BANCSALORE-560 O01.

REE BY XTS WQINCIPAL SECRETARY

…5…..

2. KO{_AR ZELLA PANCHAYATH
KOLAR REP. SY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE GFFICER,

3. DHARWAD ZILLA PANCHAYATH
DHARWAD,
REP. BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

4. RAICHUR ZIZLLA PANCHAYATH T
RAICHUR, REP. BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE omcggg, _

5. BHASKARAV
s/0 LATE VERAPPA
ZGGAVRU VILLAGE, CHAN’=A_APL-JRA; HOBi.,I=
ANEKALTALUK -. . ” ‘
SANGALORE RURAL EJIS__TRICT_ ‘

6. VENKATARAYAPPAP

s/ca PAPAN:~:A M.

AGED AEQUT 35 YEARS
‘S;=smvi$*iAKi(::g’LAre::;L.§.I TALUK
GCLLAH&L_LiiPOSTv…__ ~ ‘
“€HIN’§”AMA”NiV
KQLAR D§STRECT;., i …RESP()¥\iDEI\iTS

_;(‘By.sr: $4; :s;A§iAv;riNA REDDY, ADVOCATE
rrogsi Srnt.’ :w.v1JAvA, AGA FOR. R1 “re 4
5: sr;_t:;.ii«5ANc;I asoov, ADVGCATE FOR R6)

—-o-»e—o-

‘ *i’iiis Writ Appeai is filed u/s 4 of the Karnataka High
C~au’r;.t Act praying set aside the erder passed £21 the Writ:

X. Petition Ne.1e457;04 dated 13572305.

This appeal caming on for erders this day, Manjunath

3., Deiivered the foiiow%ng:~«

.. 5 _
LQQQLT
In this appeai, the appeiiant is chalienging the order
passed in Writ Petition 940.1045?/2004 which Petition was
fiied by one Venkatarayappa, chailienging the vieiielity and
the correctness of the Notification issued:.~«b§i of

Karnataka to rm up reguiar vacancies_irise..fajf:’as reietes

to Secretary Grade»! in var;ioi:is::”Gre’m the

State. The Notifications wereieriociuceé?’}§ini:e};iii–e§34Af B
8: C to the Writ Petitior§’;”i’e»Tifhe iearii.ed”A3iiidgje come to
the conclusion thetV.«the_«”Viiiiotlfieations wtivitcitvwere produced

aks A:1i2exii:es}i1;,ie»’BV.$i~~C,’ ii’: so far as it resatee to Grade! of

the “Secrete:’y.”to Grame Panchayat requires to be

,.EC’oueshed'”ae.V§;?ivaAi:ici. Being aggrievefi by the order another

it *ifx_{iAriA’i:% P£etivt_ion was filed by the appeiiants herein in writ

“-7.,«?ét1é’t:eo’nsi~§$aoi.19443/2007 on the ground that they were not

peijtiesii before the iearneci Judge in Writ Petition

~ 5255,1045?/2oo4 31 1174222005 and the order passed in

it “the aferesaid writ Petitions wouid affect their rights,

because the subject matter of the Writ Petitierxs was only

\’>/’

in regard to the iegaiity and the correctness of the
recruitments of Grade-I of Secretary to the Grama
Panchayat and that the appellants are aggrieved.i’n_regard

to the qtiashing of the entire Notification *uii*V:’.t.V:’¥’a«.nt3es

Grade-II. The iearned Ridge has oismisstati to:i£i’é$eti:’ti_oir:.o%

Ne.19648/2007 on 7″‘ March, 12668;«gr’ant;ie§:”i’ioeft3k’ to’:filé7_ it

a Writ Appeal. Therefore,_the apbp.’eai”i’s fileti’; ”

2. Having heard theiiibiesarnteti appearing for
the parties the oniy.._..i:,ioin’t to .vibe.._’co”ris_idered by us in this

app_eai__ . order passed in Writ Petition

No.1io4S?/2o’aéiito ttieerfect that the Notification issued by

tgrte GoveVrnmV_en’t,fo§’ recruitment to Grade-II secretaries to

«,:Vii:i*~:eE”‘i§Aazivt:’ia.eyats is issued by the respective Ziiia Panchayai:

~AV.9§.f’ter hearing the parties, we notice that the

“‘;3eti$_;iorte’i”s in Writ Petition Nes.10457[2004 and

t.Voa13.1742;2oo5 have chaiienged the iegaiity am the

it cerrectness of the Notifications issues: so far as it reiata to

Grade—I Secretary to the Grama Panchayat oniy.

(Q/.

is ailoweeda

Therefore, we are of the opinion that on account of
mistake in Cluashing the entire Notification vtVh’e”‘»learned
Judge by oversight has set aside the recro%troewo_§’;g”ofocess

of Gra{$e–II. In the circumstances these’ V
to be ailowed and the order1;:;;>;t::?:1’é
has to be modified _?:o_%din gé’~~A_:£hat
Annexures-A,B & c: and tiiefifeséer aforeseid
writ Petitions is re_Gra£§e–II .

Witfifohe eaogvel»obsebfietione;’Vibe order of the

learned Sfieqie 3Vu¢fic;V; e*’VAi$V.b£rso«o’i»fied. Accordingly this appeai

H’ …..

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE