GANGANARASAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was appointed as Hamali on 2-7-1984 by the Department of Commercial Taxes on daily wage basis was terminated on the report submitted by the Lokayuktha without even serving a notice on the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order of termination, the petitioner approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal with an application bearing No. 212 / 1992. The Tribunal, by its order dated 27-3-1992 dismissed the said application on the ground that Hamali as not a holder of civil post, as such, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 seeking the relief namely, to quash the order at Annexure-A dated 3-3-1992 by which the petitioner was terminated from service on the ground that the same as illegal, arbitrary and opposed to principles of natural justice. He has also sought for an interim order.

(2.) Notice was ordered to the learned High Court Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents. The matter is listed for hearing today.

(3.) Smt. Bhoopathy, learned Government Pleader, contended that the writ petition is not maintainable as the post of Hamali whether appointed on temporary basis, daily wages or otherwise comes within the definition of 'Civil Servant'. The nature of work the petitioner was carrying on and the authority who made the appointment are the factors to be considered to decide whether this Court has jurisdiction or not.