Babasheb S/O Parashuram Jadhav vs The Director
2022 Latest Caselaw 1446 Kant

                                  :1:


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
                               BEFORE
        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

       WRIT PETITION NO.100613/2019 (S-REG)

BETWEEN:
Babasheb S/o. Parashuram Jadhav,
Age 58 years, Occ: Pump Operator,
R/o.: Sankeshwar Town Municipal Council,
Sankeshwar, Tq.: Hukkeri, Dist.: Belagavi.
                                                         ... Petitioner
(By Shri Shrisharsh A.Neelopant, Advocate)

AND:
1.     The Director,
       Directorate of Municipal Administration,
       9th Floor, Vishweshwaraiah Tower,
       Ambedkar Veedhi, Bengaluru-560 006.
2.     The Project Director/Deputy Commissioner,
       The District City Development Cell,
       Office of Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi.
3.     The Chief Officer,
       Town Municipal Council, Sankeshwar,
       Tq.: Hukkeri, Dist.: Belagavi.
                                                      ... Respondents
(By Shri Vinayak S.Kulkarni, AGA for R1 & R2;
 Shri K.S. Patil, Advocate for R3)

      This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to
regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of initial
appointment i.e., from 01.03.1985 who is working as Pump Operator
in the respondent No.3 Municipal Council by considering the
representation of the petitioner dated 12.12.2018 as per Annexure-E.

       This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing B-Group,
this day, the Court made the following:
                                      :2:

                                     ORDER

1. The petitioner claims that he was employed as a Pump

Operator on daily wage basis from 01.03.1985.

2. On 29.11.1999, the respondent No.1 directed the

respondent No.3 to provide service benefits on the principles of equal

pay for equal work. Thereafter, the Government of Karnataka issued a

notification dated 15.11.2006 in the light of the judgment of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Umadevi in Civil Appeal

Nos.3595/199 and 3612/1999, thereby notifying the daily wage

employees working in different cadres at different local bodies in the

entire State of Karnataka from 01.01.1986 for regularization.

3. On 07.07.2007, the respondent No.1 regularised the

services of the petitioner as Pump Operator from 26.11.1991, but did

not take into account the past services rendered by the petitioner from

01.03.1985. The Secretary of the Government of Karnataka, in terms

of its communication dated 22.09.2017 directed the respondent No.1

to consider the representation of the petitioner seeking regularisation

from the date of initial appointment. The petitioner thereafter

submitted representation to respondent No.2 on 12.12.2018. The

respondent Nos.1 and 2 have not considered the claim of the

petitioner. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since

the petitioner has rendered services in the same post from

01.03.1985, the past services rendered by the petitioners ought to

have been considered for the purpose of fixation of pay, pension and

terminal benefits.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other

hand submitted that the petitioner has accepted his regularization from

26.11.1991 and therefore, he cannot now retract and claim the benefit

from his initial appointment.

6. If the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis on

01.03.1985, his past service deserves to be accounted for the limited

purpose of fixation of notional pay, retirement benefits and consequent

pension.

7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The

respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to consider the representation of

the petitioner dated 12.12.2018 as per Annexure-E within a period

three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE Vnp*