HANUMANTHARAYAPPA V. Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in the cluster of these petitions call in question an order dtd. 1/2/2016 which denies the benefit of regularization to the petitioners and have consequentially sought a direction for consideration of their claims for regularization. Since all the employees are working in different Departments of the Bangalore University ('the University' for short) and the challenge and direction sought being common, these petitions are taken up together and considered in this common order.

(2.) Adumbrated in brief, the factual background as projected by the petitioners are as follows:

(3.) All the petitioners thus, in terms of what is narrated hereinabove, have completed service in the University ranging from 20 to 25 years and are all aged between 43 and 57 years. During subsistence of engagement of their services, all the petitioners, most of whom had completed 10 years of service. The Apex Court rendered its judgment in the case of Secretary, State Of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi(3) and Others (2006) 4 SCC 1 on 10/4/2006. The entire spectrum of nuances of engagement to posts-irregular, illegal or back door were all considered by the Apex Court and certain parameters for the purpose of regularization of such employees were laid down. Certain proceedings also took place in the respondent/University pursuant to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of UMADEVI. The process of regularization was sought to be initiated by the University of several daily-wage and monthly rated employees working in the University. The University made a proposal for release of block grant from the hands of the Government towards regularization of 85 employees who had completed 10 years of service as on 10/4/2006. The communication was made on 6/8/2007. On receipt of the said letter, the State Government again directed furnishing of complete details regarding expenditure that would be incurred by the University for the proposed regularization. In reply the University by its communication dtd. 14/11/2007 replied stating that the expenditure for such regularization would be made out of regular grants received from Government. While doing so the University added 46 employees who were working on daily wages wherein the names of some of the petitioners in these petitions also figure. By a communication dtd. 15/3/2008 the Government accorded its approval for regularization of 85 persons who had completed 10 years of service and not the remaining 46 persons who were included in the later communication.