B.H. SOMASHEKAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE, THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 01, THE DEPARTMENT OF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Advocate to accept notice for Respondents No. 1to 4 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and persued the petition papers.

(2.) THE Petitioners are before this Court claiming that they are working in the Karnataka State Reserve Police. In addition to the other services rendered by them, it is contended that their services were utilised by induction them in special Talk Force ('the STF' For short) which was constituted for the specific and sole purpose of capturing the forse brigand Veerappan in M.M. HIlls in Chamarajansger. The Petitioners contend that they were also the Serving Parsonnal among the 754 members of the STF, who were involved in the poeration which ultimately resulted in killing of Veerappan on 18.10.2004. The case Petitioners is that the Respondents by their circulars which are produced along with the writ petitions had announced rewaes for the person who had served in the STF. In this regard, it is also the contention of the Petitioners that when the same had not been complied with by the Respondents, certain other members of the STF approached this Court by filing W.P. 19957/2009 seeking a direction for allotment of sites. The said petition was disposed of on 21.07.2009

(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate would state that at the outsed, the Respondents would have to verify the correctness or otherwise of the details stated in the representations as at Annsexures - F 1. to F 5O and consider as to whether the Petitioners -are similarly placed as that of the persons to whom the circulars would apply and also whether they are entitled to the benefit that has been extended by this Court in the cited decision. It is only after recording a finding on that aspect of the matter, the further consideration of representations would arise and the said exercise in any event would have to be undertaken by the Respondent.