GEETHA V PATIL AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND THE KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Madhusudhan, learned Advocate submits that he has instructions to appear for respondent No. 3. Service is complete. By consent, heard for final disposal forthwith.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners state that the questions involved and the prayers made in the present writ petitions are covered by the judgment and order dated 28.2.2013 of this Court in W.A. No. 5127/12 and in connected appeals. Learned counsel submits that he has instructions not to press prayers (c) and (d) made in the writ petitions. His statement is recorded and accepted.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners also placed before this Court the order dated 28.2.13 passed in W.A. Nos. 5866 -6258/12, by which the said appeals were disposed of in terms of the judgment and order dated 28.2.13 passed in W.A. 5127/12 and connected appeals. Learned counsel for the parties have no objection for disposing of the present writ petition in terms of the said order. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER i. This Court vide judgment and order dated 28.2.13 disposed of W.A. No. 5127/12 and connected appeals. All the appeals were filed by the Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (KREIS), who is the 3rd respondent in the present writ petition. The operative portion of the judgment dated 28.2.13 reads thus: In the result, the writ appeals filed by the appellants -Society are dismissed. We affirm the view taken by the learned Single Judge that the respondents -Principals and teachers shall be entitled for service weightage. It is needless to mention that the respondents will be entitled for service weightage provided they have appeared for combined competitive examinations held on 24.7.11 to 27.7.11. The appellant -society as far as possible, try to accommodate the respondents, if after giving service weightage are selected, without disturbing the candidates who have already been selected and appointed. Since their appointments are made subject to result of the writ petitions, in the event of discontinuing any one of them, for accommodating the respondents, they shall discontinue or with the appointment on "Last come first go" principle. There doesn't appear to be any dispute that the case of every individual petitioners in these writ petitions is covered by the judgment and order dated 28.2.13. Therefore, without examining merits of the case any further, I make clear that, if the petitioners are covered by the judgment dated 28.2.13, they shall also be extended benefits of the said judgment by the 3rd respondent -KREIS. Though it is clarified in the judgment dated 28.2.13, once again, this Court, reiterates that only if the petitioners have appeared for combined competitive examinations held between 24.2.11 and 27.2.11, and if they are not age barred, they would be entitled for the benefits of the said judgment. If any of the petitioners is age barred, it is open for such petitioners to apply for age relaxation and if any such application is made, "I hope and trust the KREIS will consider the same in accordance with law/rules within a period of six weeks from the date of such application and shall communicate the order to those petitioners immediately thereafter. With these observations, this group of writ petitions is disposed of.