IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, _
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY,OF_AU€}US"ii.';V2i)08_:.AV k
BEFORE E» A
THE HOTTELE MR. Jir=;r;:cE
WRIT PETITTGN NQ__i(_I322_»_VOF'. %20o E (ET;
BEPWEEN:
1 THIMMAPPA G V_S--;Qj'VEERABHA§D}RAPPA
AGED 3:: YEARS; oc<3;sUPEEv1s;0R,
IN M.D4.R.S.5';jHC)LAI.PL!§;RE.« in
R/O A'NTFiAPURA"P§)S'P,:DODA BBIGERE,
TQ;IiOLALK:'£-;RE,.,_D1ST: QHFFRADURGA.
2 T '
S/O ~T.D.ChI'I'I'A1AH._ T
AGED '28"IEE.R&-E, "
T, ._;0C1sT. CHITRADURGA.
. .. fPET1'I'IONERS.
T Sri DHARIGOND, ADV. FOR
Em? G CHIKKANARAGUND, ADV. )
% THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE 1.
2 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRICNPAL,
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL é _» _ ~ V " V.
WELFARE M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE
3 THE STATE OF KARNATKA
REPERSEFNED BYl'i'SPRINC)IPAL%, R M «
SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT é »
85 PANCHAYAT RAJ, DEP.AR'rMafm?, " '
M.s.BUH,DING,BANGA1;oRE_1.
4 THE STATE OF KARNA'I'KA.A'
REPRESENTED BY_R*s s1:«:QRr.:ARY,
EDUCATION DEPAR'i'MEN1:?--,{PRIMARYV
& SECONDARY EDUCATEQN), A '.
M.S.BUlLDlNG.,_ Bg;NGALoRE;~1 R a R
5 THE EX;ECLFI;§$*;E3
E1f)UCA'1'I0NAL,
INS¥PI'I'I}'i'IM1NoRrrY,
WRLRARE DEPARTMENT, CHITRADURGA,
R . , 13131'; CHITRADURGA.
. .. RESPONDENTS.
R .:’..:”(By: Sri SHASHIDI-{AR KARAMADI, A.G.A. )
THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONS’I’I’I’U’I’ION, PRAYING TO DRECI’ THE
RESPONDENTS T0 TREAT THE APPOINTMENTS OF THE
PEITITIONERS AS VALID AS DECLARED BY THE HON’BLE
SUPREME COURT IN THE CASES REPORTED
SC PAGE 276, AIR 1978 SC 327, AIR 1968
(GOPINATH GUNDACI-IARS CASE), AIR 1964 SC PAGE 1354*
(CHAMPAKLAL vs UNION OF INDIA) 1%6(3)S
SCR 682 (Am 1966 SC PAGEC’1942}._ {NAGARAJAN vs 1
STATE OF MYSORE). * ‘
RESTRAIN THE RESPOfii3EN’fS- ITIOAI E;IISEOIéCINSe
THE C & R RULES CALLED
DEPARTMENT SERVICES [RECRUITMENT “OF_N£iVODAYA/
I MORARJI DESAI SCHOOL) PRINCIPALS AND
TEACHERS (SPECIAL ‘RECR!}Ij*TlJENT). “RULES 2006 IN
RESPECT OF THE VACANCY vAL[READY_’: FILLED EARLIER
To THE DATE ON” ‘RULES..:HAVE COME INTO
I>IRECT TO EXTEND THE FULL
SALARY ()€<'IqIER._.' ALLOWANCES ADMISSIBLE IN
ACCORDANCE
THIS' EE'rII?IOIsIAjT} COIIINO ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, '1'I;IE.._COUI?I' MADE THE FOLLOWING:
WmQEQER TTTT
he matter is listed for prelim1naIy'
it is taken up for final disposal.
2. “‘Mr.v~..’:Di*~_a’1igond, learned counsel appearing for the
K # submits that the subject matter of this Writ
is identical to the one in W.P. 9391/08, disposed of
A flbn3.7.2oOS. ‘ fl.
//T”
4
3. Following the Ieasonings stated therein, this writ
petition also stands disposed of in the following ._
1) Respondents to consider the
petitioners in the light of the Iecommerigiafiohs ” »
Executive Director of the Iespondexiig h’ *
2) Till their Iepreseritations “the >
services of the petitioners are
Mr. Shashidhar “A…_(.’:.A. is permitted
to file memo of appearance
sd/~
Iudge