Karnataka High Court
Suresh Choori vs The Government Of India And Ors on 2 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
WA No. 200130 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT APPEAL NO.200130 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SURESH CHOORI
S/O NIJANIGAWWA CHOORI,
AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: WORKING AS MESSENGER,
AT DIST. AIDS PREVENSION AND
CONTROL UNIT (DAPCU),
DISTRICT HOSPITAL CAMPUS,
ATHANI ROAD,
VIJAYPUR - 586 127.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed by (BY SMT. SHARADA PATIL KULGERI, ADVOCATE)
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ
DHUTTARGAON AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ADDL. SECRETARY AND
DIRECTOR GENERAL,
NATIONAL CONTROL ORGANIZATION,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
FAMILY WELFARE,
6TH AND 9TH FLOOR,
CHANDARLOK BUILDING,
36 JANAPATH, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
WA No. 200130 of 2023
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND FAMILY WELFARE,
105, 1ST FLOOR,
VIKAS SOUDHA,
BENGALURU- 560 001.
3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA STATE, AIDS
PREVENTION SOCIETY,
AROGYA SOUDHA,
4TH FLOOR, EAST WING,
LEPROSY HOSPITAL COMPOUND,
BENGALURU - 560 023.
4. THE DISTRICT CONTROLLING OFFICER
DIST. AIDS PREVENTION AND
CONTROL UNIT (DAPACU),
DIST. HOSPITAL CAMPUS,
ATHANI ROAD, VIJAYAPURA- 586 127.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI FOR R1;
SRI.MALLIKARJUNA C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R2 TO R4,
SRI.DR.S.V.GIRIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER
DATED 13.09.2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
IN WRIT PETITION NO.202578/2023.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY
ASHOK S. KINAGI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
WA No. 200130 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the order dated
13.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.202578/2023.
2. It is the case of the appellant that, the
appellant has been appointed as Messenger in the
respondent No.4 as per the appointment letter dated
30.09.2009 and thereafter, an agreement was entered
into by respondent No.4 with the petitioner as per
Annexure-C. The respondent No.3 issued circular dated
01.08.2023 stating that there is no budget allocation for
the year 2022-23 insofar as functioning in the respondent
No.4 and accordingly, respondent No.4 issued notice dated
05.08.2023 vide Annexure-F. The petitioner aggrieved by
the notice dated 05.08.2023 filed the writ petition seeking
to quash Annexure-F and also sought for mandamus
directing the respondent No.4 to continue the services of
the petitioner as Messenger.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant,
learned DSGI for respondent No.1 and learned
Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.2 to 4.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is working since 2009 and it is a contractual
appointment and the said contract was extended from
time to time. She submits that the respondents cannot
remove the appellant without following due procedure.
She further submits that the learned Single Judge has
committed an error in passing the impugned order. Hence,
on these grounds, she prays to allow the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate
appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 supports the
impugned order and prays to dismiss the appeal.
6. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
7. It is not in dispute that, the appellant was
appointed as Messenger in the respondent No.4
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
and accordingly, Memorandum of Agreement was
executed as per Annexure-C. We have perused Annexure-
C. It discloses the term of contract is for a period of 11
months 29 days starting from 02.04.2023 to 31.03.2024.
Further, as per Clause-12 of the Memorandum of
Agreement, on termination of the contract, the employee
shall return all such files/documents/reports/official
information used by him in hard form and in soft forms to
the office. The agreement entered into between the
appellant and respondent No.4 came to end on
31.03.2024. The respondent No.4 has not extended the
period of contract and further respondent No.4 has issued
an endorsement stating that there is no budget allocation
in regard to payment of salary insofar as appellant is
concerned.
8. The learned Single Judge was justified in
passing the impugned order. Considering the
memorandum of agreement, as the term of contract came
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4475-DB
to an end, nothing further survives for consideration in the
writ petition.
9. In view of the above discussion, we do not find
any error in the impugned order. Hence, we decline to
interfere with the same. Accordingly, we proceed to pass
the following:
ORDER
The Writ Appeal is dismissed as being devoid of
merits.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
VNR
CT;BN
