Karnataka High Court

Smt. Thanuja vs The Secretary on 16 February, 2022

Bench: H T Prasad

                          1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

              W.P.No.56200 OF 2017(S-REG)

BETWEEN:

1.     MRS S SUNITHA,
       W/O R SUNDARAMURTHY,
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.C/96, C BLOCK,
       SWAMY VIVEKANANDA EXTENSION,
       P.O GOPALA-577201
       SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

2.     MRS. K.A. REVATHI
       W/O MAHESHA S.T.
       AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
       R/AT GOPALA CIRCLE,
       P.O. GOPALA-577201,
       SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

3.     K N JAGADEVAPPA,
       S/O NANJUNDAIAH,
       AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
       R/AT KOPPA,
       P.O.GORAGONDANAHALLI-572201,
       TIPTUR TALUK,
       TUMKUR DISTRICT.

4.     G.S. GAYATHRI
       W/O M N NIRANJANAMURTHY,
       AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
                         2



     R/AT P.O.GORAGONDANAHLLI-572201.
     TIPTUR TALUK,
     TUMKUR DISTRICT.

5.   NIRANJAN,
     S/O RAMAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
     R/AT KAMMIGALA STREET,
     RAGHAVENDRA EXTENSION,
     P.O.N.R.PURA-577134
     CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT.

6.   PRAVEEN K.H,
     S/O HIRIYANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
     R/AT KOTARIKOPPA,
     P.O KIGGA-577129
     SRINGERI TLAUK,
     CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT.

7.   NAGAVENI H N,
     W/O SATISH A.D.,
     AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
     R/AT ANANDUR, BALEHALLI,
     P.O HOSAGADDE-577411
     SHIMOGA DISTRICT.

8.   ROHINI M.K.,
     W/O ARUNACHALA G.N.,
     AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
     R/AT GUDDEKOPPA,
     P.O R.S.PURA-577139,
     SHIMOGA DISTRICT.

9.   MALLANAGOUDA C HIREGOUDAR,
     S/O CHENNAPPAGOUDA,
     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
     R/AT P.O.BYAHATTI-580023,
     HUBLI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT.
                           3




10 .   KALLAPPA Y SATYAMMANAVAR
       S/O YELLAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
       R/AT P.O KOLIWAD-580023
       HUBLI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT.

11 .   VEERAPPA N KATTANI
       S/O NINGAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
       R/AT P.O HIRENARTI-581113
       KUNDAGOL TALUK,
       DHARWAD DISTRICT.

12 .   ASHOKA Y BAKALE,
       S/O YELLUSA,
       AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
       R/AT PETABANE,
       P.O.LAKSHMESHWAR-582116
       GADAG DISTRICT.

13 .   SHAMBHULINGA SHIVAPPA MILLALLI,
       S/O SHIVAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
       R/AT HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
       P.O SHIGGAON-581205,
       HAVERI DISTRICT.

14 .   H S NAGANAGOUDA,
       S/O H SHIVAVASANAGOUDA,
       AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
       R/AT BAGFEVADI BASAVESHWAR NILAYA,
       19TH WARD, SADASHIVANAGAR,
       P.O SIRUGUPPA-583121.
       BELLARY DISTRICT.

15 .   H MALLIKARJUNAGOUDA,
       S/O P MUDUKANAGOUDA,
       AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
                           4



       R/AT MAILAPUR VILLAGE,
       P.O BALAKUKNDI-583121,
       SIRAGUPPA TALUK,
       BELLARY DISTRICT.

16 .   NIJAGUNA M
       S/O M NAMBENNA,
       AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
       R/AT LIG-81, K.H.B.COLONY,
       13TH WARD,. SIRUGUPPA-583121,
       BELLARY DISTRICT.

17 .   D RAGHAVENDRA RAO,
       S/O NARAYANA RAO,
       AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
       R/AT SATHYANARAYANAPET,
       1ST CROSS, IST MAIN,
       P.O.GANGAVATHI-583227,
       KOPPA DISTRICT.

18 .   DESAIGOUDA
       S/O NINGANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL,
       AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
       GONDBAL, P.O KOPPAL-583228.

19 .   S.GIRISH,
       S/O A.T. SHANKARAPPA GOWDRU,
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
       R/AT BENKIKERE VILLAGE,
       P.O.HODIGERE-577213
       CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
       DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

20 .   SHANKARA B
       S/O BORAIAH,
       AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
       R/AT DOOR NO.392,
                            5



       NEW KUKRUBA STREET.
       T.NARASIPURA-571124,
       MYSURU DISTRICT.

21 .   B.S. MANJULA,
       W/O B SUDHAKUMAR,
       AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
       R/AT OPP.CHOWDESHWARI
       KALYANA MANTAP,
       P.O.HIREBIDANOOR TALUK-561208,
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

22 .   R DHARMINI,
       W/O Y R BABU,
       AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
       WORKING AS STAFF,
       BAGEPALLI TALUK PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O BAGEPALLI,
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

23 .   VINAYA KUMAR K,
       S/O LATE DEVAPPA ACHARYA,
       AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
       R/AT SAMETHADKA HOUSE,
       DARBE POST,
       PUTTUR-574202 D.K.

24 .   SURESH P,
       S/O LATE NARAYANA NAIK,
       AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
       R/AT JANATHA HOUSE,
       MANJALPADPU,
       NEHRU NAGAR,
       P.O PUTTUR-574202 (D.K).

25 .   BHARATH T
       S/O VISHWANATH GOWDA,
                            6



       AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
       R/AT TENKILA,
       P.O PUTTUR-574202 (D.K).

26 .   DINESH M.S.,
       S/O M.D.SUBBANNA GOWDA,
       AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
       R/AT KODTHALKAJE HOUSE,
       GUTHIGAR VILLAGE,
       P.O GUTHIGAR-574218,
       SULLIA TALUK (DK).

27 .   B.DAYANANDA,
       S/O VENKATESH SAPALYA,
       AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
       R/AT VENKATESH KRIPA,
       MUDANADUGODU VILLAGE,
       P.O BANTWAL-574211 (DK),

28 .   GANESHA,
       S/O KRISHNAPPA DEVADIGA,
       AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
       R/AT KEREMANE HOUSE,
       10-THOKUR VILLAGE AND POST,
       VIA HALYANPADI (DK)-574146.

                                       ...PETITIONERS


(BY SRI.M SUDHAKAR PAI, ADV.(PH))

AND

1.     THE COMMON CADRE COMMITTEE,
       FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF PRIMARY
       CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL
       AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,
       KARNATAKA STATE,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
                        7



     ALUR VENKAT RAO ROAD,
     CHAMARAJPET,
     BENGALURU-560018.

2.   THE MANAGER,
     SHIVAMOGGA TALUK
     PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
     DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
     KRISHI SADANA,
     BALARAJ URS ROAD,
     SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

3.   THE MANAGER,
     TIPTUR TALUK ,
     PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
     DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
     R.M.C.YARD, Y.T.ROAD,
     TIPTUR-572201,
     TUMKUR DISTRICT.

4.   THE MANAGER,
     N.R.PURA TALUK,
     PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE,
     AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
     DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
     P.O SRINGERI-577139
     CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT.

5.   THE MANAGER
     SRINGERI TALUK
     PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
     DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
     P.O SRINGERI-577139,
     CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT.
                           8



6.     THE MANAGER,
       HUBLI TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       NEAR BASAV VANA,
       HUBLI-560029
       DHARWAD DISTRICT.

7.     THE MANAGER,
       KUNDAGAL TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       KUNDAGAL-581113,
       DHARWAD DISTRICT.

8.     THE MANAGER,
       LAXMESHWAR TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O LAXMESHWAR-582116,
       GADAG DISTRICT.

9.     THE MANAGER,
       SHIGGAON TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,
       P.O SHIGGAON-581205,
       HAVERI DISTRICT.

10 .   THE MANAGER,
       SIRUGUPPA TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
       BANK LTD.,
       P.O SIRUGUPPA-583121,
       BELLARY DISTRICT.
                           9



11 .   THE MANAGER,
       GANGAVATHI TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE,
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O GANGAVATHI-583227,
       KOPPAL DISTRICT.

12 .   THE MANAGER,
       KOPPAL TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       BASAVESHWARA CIRCLE,
       HOSPET ROAD,
       P.O KOPPAL-583231,
       KOPPAL DISTRICT.

13 .   THE MANAGER,
       CHANNAGIRI TLAUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       CHANNAGIRI-577213,
       DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

14 .   THE MANAGER,
       T.NARASIPURA TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O T.NARASIPURA-571124,
       MYSURU DISTRICT.

15 .   THE MANAGER,
       GAURIBIDANOOR TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULLTURAL AND RURAL
                          10



       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       GAURIBIDANOOR-561208,
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

16 .   THE MANAGER,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       BAGEPALLI-561207,
       CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

17 .   THE MANAGER,
       PUTTUR,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O PUTTUR-574201 (DK),

18 .   THE MANAGER,
       SULLIA,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O SULLIA-574239 (DK).

19 .   THE MANAGER,
       BANTWAL,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       P.O.JUDUMARGA-574219 (1DK).

20 .   THE MANAGER,
       MANGALURU TALUK,
       PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE,
       AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL
       DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.,
       NEAR SUBRAMANYA SADANA,
                               11



     MANGALURU-575003 (DK).

                                                ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. P ANAND, ADV. FOR R1 & R3:
NOTICE TO R2 AND R4 TO R20 ARE SERVED
AND UNREPRESENTED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO DIRECT R-1 TO REGULARISE THE SERVICES OF TEH
PETITIONERS,   FORTHWITH,   WITH  EXTENSION    OF
REGULAR PAY SCALES AND ALL CONSEQUENTIAL
BENEFITS ARISING THEREFROM, GRANT AN INTERIM
ORDER TO DIRECT R-1 NOT TO TERMINATE THE SERVICES
OF THE PETITIONERS AND ETC.

     THIS  WRIT    PETITION, COMING    ON   FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE
COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                             ORDER

In this writ petition the petitioners have sought

for the following reliefs:

"A writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent - Common Cadre Committee, to regularize the services of the petitioners, forthwith, with extension of regular pay scales and all consequential benefits arising therefrom."

2. The case of the petitioners is that they were

appointed by the respondent - Banks on daily wage

basis between the years 1994 to 2006, on different

dates as Computer Operator, Second Division

Assistant, Attendar, Accountant, Clerk and Driver.

Even though they have been appointed on daily wage

basis, they have been continued in service for more

than 10 years. Since their services has not been

regularized, they approached the respondent - Banks.

In the meantime, the first respondent - the Common

Cadre Committee has requested the respondent -

Banks vide Annexure-C dated 12.03.2013 to furnish

the details in respect of the daily wage employees who

have been appointed from 01.11.1992 to 10.04.1996

and who has continuously served for more than 10

years. In response to the same the respondent -

Banks have furnished the list of the employees

working in their banks on daily wage basis and who

have completed 10 years of service vide Annexures D,

D1 to D21. Thereafter, the first respondent has not

taken any decision to regularize the services of the

petitioners. Since no action has been taken by the

first respondent for regularizing the services of the

petitioners, the petitioners are before this Court.

3. Sri M.Sudhakar Pai, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners have been appointed on daily wage basis

from 1994 to 2006 on different dates and they were

working in different posts in the respondent - Banks

without any break. Even though their appointment is

against a clear vacancy and they have completed a

period of more than 10 years, their services has not

been regularized.

4. He further contended that the first respondent

himself has requested the Banks to furnish the details

of the petitioners to regularize their services.

Pursuant to that the Banks have furnished the

particulars of the petitioners to the first respondent.

Thereafter no action has been taken to regularize their

services.

5.It is his further contention that in view of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

SECRETARY TO THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND

OTHERS vs. UMADEVI reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1,

the petitioners are entitled for regularization of their

services.

6. He further contended that in similar

circumstances, in respect of the persons who are

working in the Co-operative Banks, this Court in

W.P.No.1338/1998 and other connected petitions,

disposed of on 12.11.1998 has directed the Common

Cadre Committee to consider the case of the

petitioners therein, who were the employees of the

Taluk Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural

Development Banks for regularization. Therefore, he

sought for allowing the writ petition.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

and perused the writ papers.

8. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were

appointed on daily wages on different dates from 1994

to 2006. They are working in the respondent - Banks

in different posts. Even though they have been

appointed on daily wage basis, their services has been

continued without any break, till today. Since the first

respondent has taken a decision to regularize the

services of the employees who have completed 10

years of service as per Annexure-C dated 12.03.2013,

requested the respondent - Banks to submit the

details of the daily wage employees working in their

banks and who have completed 10 years of service.

Pursuant to that, the respondent - Banks have

submitted the list of the daily wage employees

working in their banks and who have completed 10

years of service. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of UMADEVI (supra) has held as hereinbelow:

"52. Normally, what is sought for by such temporary employees when they approach the court, is the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the employer, the State or its instrumentalities, to absorb them in permanent service or to allow them to continue. In this context, the question arises whether a mandamus could be issued in favour of such persons. At this juncture, it will be proper to refer to the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Dr. Rai Shivendra Bahadur Vs. The Governing Body of the Nalanda College [(1962) Supp. 2 SCR 144]. That case arose out of a refusal to promote the writ

petitioner therein as the Principal of a college. This Court held that in order that a mandamus may issue to compel the authorities to do something, it must be shown that the statute imposes a legal duty on the authority and the aggrieved party had a legal right under the statute or rule to enforce it. This classical position continues and a mandamus could not be issued in favour of the employees directing the government to make them permanent since the employees cannot show that they have an enforceable legal right to be permanently absorbed or that the State has a legal duty to make them permanent.

53. One aspect needs to be clarified.

There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. NARAYANAPPA (supra), R.N. NANJUNDAPPA (supra), and B.N. NAGARAJAN (supra), and referred to in paragraph 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts

might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of courts or of tribunals. The question of regularization of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases above referred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularization, if any

already made, but not subjudice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further by-passing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme."

9. In the subsequent judgment of the Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of SHEO NARAIN NAGAR

AND OTHERS vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND

ANOTHER reported in (2018) 13 SCC 432 at

paragraph 7 has held as follows:

"7. When we consider the prevailing scenario, it is painful to note that the decision in Uma Devi (3) [State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3), (2006) 4 SCC 1: 2006 SCC (L & S) 753] has not been properly understood and rather wrongly applied by various State Governments. We have called for the data in the instant case to ensure as

to how many employees were working on contract basis or ad-hoc basis or daily-wage basis in different State departments. We can take judicial notice that widely aforesaid practice is being continued. Though this Court has emphasised that incumbents should be appointed on regular basis as per rules but new devise of making appointment on contract basis has been adopted, employment is offered on daily wage basis etc. in exploitative forms. This situation was not envisaged by Uma Devi (supra). The prime intendment of the decision was that the employment process should be by fair means and not by back door entry and in the available pay scale. That spirit of the Uma Devi (supra) has been ignored and conveniently overlooked by various State Governments/ authorities. We regretfully make the observation that Uma Devi (supra) has not be implemented in its true spirit and has not been followed in its pith and substance. It is being used only as a tool for not regularizing the services of incumbents.

They are being continued in service without payment of due salary for which they are entitled on the basis of Article 14, 16 read with Article 34 (1)(d) of the Constitution of India as if they have no constitutional protection as envisaged in D.S. Nakara v. Union of India [D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305: 1983 SCC (L & S) 145 : AIR 1983 SC 130] from cradle to grave. In heydays of life they are serving on exploitative terms with no guarantee of livelihood to be continued and in old age they are going to be destituted, there being no provision for pension, retiral benefits etc. There is clear contravention of constitutional provisions and aspiration of downtrodden class. They do have equal rights and to make them equals they require protection and cannot be dealt with arbitrarily. The kind of treatment meted out is not only bad but equally unconstitutional and is denial of rights. We have to strike a balance to really implement the ideology of Uma Devi (supra).

Thus, the time has come to stop the

situation where Uma Devi (supra) can be permitted to be flouted, whereas, this Court has interdicted such employment way back in the year 2006. The employment cannot be on exploitative terms, whereas Uma Devi (supra) laid down that there should not be back door entry and every post should be filled by regular employment, but a new device has been adopted for making appointment on payment of paltry system on contract/adhoc basis or otherwise. This kind of action is not permissible, when we consider the pith and substance of true spirit in Uma Devi (supra)."

10. Even a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

W.P.No.1338/1998 disposed of on 12.11.1998 has

directed the Common Cadre Committee to regularize

the services of the petitioners who were similarly

placed. Since the case of the petitioners has not been

considered by the first respondent, it is suffice for this

Court to direct the first respondent to consider the

case of the petitioners for regularization, keeping in

view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

the case of UMADEVI (supra) and SHEO NARAIN

NAGAR (supra) and the order passed by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1338/1998 and