NARAYAN IRAYYA NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was appointed as an Electrician in the fifth respondent, Town Municipal Council on temporary basis has preferred the instant writ petition with the prayer to quash the order at Annexure-A, dtd. 7/7/2018, passed by the third respondent and also to issue a writ of mandamus directing the third & fifth respondents to absorb the petitioner in permanent service under the fifth respondent pursuant to the resolution at Annexure-B, dtd. 3/4/1996.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the material available on record.

(3.) Facts leading to filing of this writ petition narrated briefly are, the petitioner was appointed as an Electrician with the fifth respondent on 1/10/1994 on temporary basis. Considering the services rendered by the petitioner, the third respondent had forwarded a proposal dtd. 24/2/2016 addressed to the second respondent recommending the petitioner's case for regularization of his services. Since, the recommendation was not considered by the competent authority, the petitioner had approached this Court in W.P. No.109957/2016 seeking a writ of mandamus. This Court on 12/7/2017 disposed off the said writ petition directing the competent authority / Deputy Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. Thereafter, the Office of the Deputy Commissioner has issued the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A, dtd. 7/7/2018 rejecting the case of the petitioner for regularization on the ground that the petitioner's appointment was not as against the sanctioned post. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.