SIDDAPPA NAGAPPA MULANGI Vs. DIRECTOR FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the ex-contractor who was providing the services of pour karmikas to the respondent No.4-Town Municipal Council with the prayer to direct respondent Nos.2 to 4 to consider the representations made by him vide Annexures-C, E, F and K. Perusal of the said representations at Annexures-C, E, F and K would go to show that in the said representations, the petitioner has made a prayer to regularize the services of pour karmikas, whose services were provided by the petitioner to the respondent No.4- Town Municipal Council.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.4 has prepared a separate list of pour karmikas other than the pour karmikas whose services were provided by the petitioner, for the purpose of regularization.

(3.) The petitioner is only a contractor who had provided services of pour karmikas to the respondent No.4. On behalf of the said pour karmikas, the petitioner cannot maintain this petition seeking regularization of their services. It is for such pour karmikas whose services were provided by the petitioner, to approach this Court independently and seek appropriate relief and on their behalf petitioner cannot maintain this writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.