1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION No.28103 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both parties.
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "......to issue a writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that (a) the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date on which they completed the required service in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Umadevi Vs, State of Karnataka as illegal and arbitrary, violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India (b) further declare that petitioners are entitled for regularization of their services from the date on which they completed required service in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court with all consequences benefits .....".
Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents.
It has been contended by the petitioners that they are working in different cadres with the respondents and they have completed more than ten years of service and they are entitled for regularization of their services in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umadevi1 and in fact the 4th respondent has recommended their cases for regularization to the 3rd respondent and the recommendations submitted by the 4th respondent are pending before the 3rd respondent. But, so far, the 3rd respondent has not 1 2006 (4) SCC 1 2 forwarded the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent to the State Government.
Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the 3rd respondent to forward the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent to the State Government within a reasonable period of time and further direct the State Government to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Further, the petitioners may be permitted to submit a detailed representation to the State Government, so as to enable the State Government to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had contended that the respondents are not disputing with regard to the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent for regularizing the services of the petitioners to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent would forward the proposal to the State Government within a reasonable period of time and thereafter, the State Government will consider the case of petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to forward the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent to the State Government within a reasonable period of time, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the State Government shall consider the proposal submitted by the 3rd respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by 3 duly considering the representation, which is likely to be submitted by the petitioners, in another three months thereafter. It is needless to state that the petitioners are permitted to submit a detailed representation to the State Government within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 10.11.2021 Prv