C.G. JAGADEESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as a typist on 3-11-1987 on contract basis for a period of three months. He was posted in the office of the third respondent. His appointment was continued from time to time. He was continued in the said post for more than 20 years. Subsequently, by the impugned orders issued by the respondents-authorities, his services were terminated and in his place the fourth respondent was appointed. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed the instant Application before the Tribunal, wherein the Tribunal allowed the application, directing the respondents to examine the case of the petitioner for continuing his services till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years, as mandated in Section 3(1) of the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Being not satisfied by the order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner-applicant has filed this writ petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is erroneous and liable to be quashed. That the Tribunal failed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of SECRETARY, STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS vs UMADEVI, 2006 4 SCC 1]. He contends that the petitioner having worked for the past three decades, the Tribunal having not considered the same and has passed the impugned order. He relies upon various orders passed by the Supreme Court as well as this court, on the ground that the persons therein were in employment for more than two decades and their services were ordered to be regularized.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents defends the impugned order.