N. LATHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are working in respondent No. 3 - Industrial Tribunal on contract basis from the year 1996. The request of the petitioners for regularization was rejected by issuing an endorsement in the year 2002. The petitioners being aggrieved by the same approached this Court in W.P. Nos. 46249/2002 and 44777/2002. A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.08.2010 set aside the endorsement and remanded the matter to the respondents to reconsider the matter and the operative portion reads as under: 9. In the result and for the above reasons, the Writ Petitions are allowed -in -part. The impugned endorsement are set aside. The Respondent -appointing authority is directed to reconsider the matter and if vacancies are available, pass an order regularizing the services of the petitioners as per law taking note of continuous past service rendered by them. On remand from this Court the respondents have now issued the impugned endorsement dated 01.02.2012 again rejecting the request of the petitioners. Hence, these writ petitions.

(2.) HEARD arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.

(3.) THE Supreme Court while explaining the scope of Umadevi's case in the case of State of Karnataka and Others Vs. M.L. Kesari and Others, AIR 2010 SC 2587 laid down the following conditions for regularization of an employee.