K HANUMANTHA RAO Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were hereditary Village Officers designated Karnams in different villages of Bellary District.

(2.) When the Supreme Court in the case of Dasaratha Rama Rao v. State of A.P., AIR. 1961 SC. 564 declared that application of hereditary principle would be an infringement of Article 16 of the Constitution, it became necessary for the State Government to take steps to make other provision in accordance with law for appointment of Village Officers. The details of statutory and other provisions made in that regard and the course of litigation consequent thereon are found stated in the judgment of this Court in C.S.Narasimha Murthy v. State of Mysore, (1968) 2 Mys.L.J. 366. A brief reference thereto is also made in the order of this Court dated the 13th of January 1971 in the case of Krishna Rao Deshpande W. P. 532 of 1969 and connected cases.

(3.) For the disposal of these cases, it is enough to state that in the first instance there were promulgated on the 29th of November 1961 rules called the Mysore General Services (Revenue Subordinate Branch) Village Accountants (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 1961. Rule 10 thereof providing for initial recruitment stated that recruitment for the first time in respect of the posts of Village Accountants shall be made partly from persons already holding the posts of Village Officers and partly by direct recruitment. A proviso appended to the first clause of the rules made certain relaxation or concession in favour of persons already holding posts of Village Officers, in respect of age and educational qualifications, in the event of there being any deficiency in the number of qualified persons even after advertising the vacancies twice over.