Long-term service in sanctioned positions can warrant regularization despite age limitations in recruitment, emphasizing continuity and eligibility for qualified employees.

ORDER :

M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer.

A. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the communication dated 07.11.2024 issued by the 3^rd respondent which is produced at Annexure-C;

B. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 10.03.2025 which is produced at Annexure-D and grant regularization of the petitioner’s service for the post of librarian, taking into account her long tenure and eligibility;

C. Pass such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Heard the learned counsel Ms. Gayatri S.R. appearing for the petitioner, learned AGA Smt. Girija S. Hiremath representing respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Smt. Chetana S. Biraj for respondent No.4.

3. Facts in brief germane are as follows.

The petitioner is appointed as a clerk cum typist on 01.01.2001 at the South Konkan Society's G.S. Sai College, Belgavi. It transpires later the petitioner on acquisition of the requisite qualification in Library Sciences is appointed as a Librarian. In the interregnum it transpires that the notification was issued, but there was no selection process initiated.

4. Be that as it may, the petitioner continued to work as a librarian in the said college and is working even today in the said post. Therefore, the petitioner initially as clerk cum typist and librarian later has rendered close to 24 years of service.

5. In the light of the said circumstance, the petitioner submits a representation seeking regularisation of services on 10.03.2025. The institution forwards the same to the State Government. The non-consideration of the representation is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to be regularised in the services as 24 years have passed by from the date on which the petitioner is appointed initially as a clerk cum typist and later as a librarian. The learned counsel would submit only to the fact that the government has communicated to the institute to initiate process of recruitment and the incidental challenge is to a communication of the State Government to the institution that they should follow the ratio of 1:5 while calling for applications in change to 1:10 that was called earlier. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that would not have any bearing if a direction is issued to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent Smt. Chetna Biraj representing the institution submits that they have enclosed the representation and communicated it to the State. It is for the State to take a decision in the matter as it is an aided institution.

8. The Learned HCGP submits that the representation of the petitioner is submitted only on 10.03.2025 and would merit consideration in accordance with law, if reasonable time is granted.

9. Though the petition could be disposed with a direction to consider the representation in accordance with law, I deem it appropriate to amplify the direction by quoting a judgment rendered by this Court with regard to regularization of a similarly situated librarian in different organization in W.P. No.101459/2023. This Court has held as follows.

“The petitioner at the relevant point in time had possessed Master Degree in Library and Information Science. Owing to her qualification, the fourth respondent appointed the petitioner as a Librarian in the fifth respondent - College run by the fourth respondent, on 19.07.2004. The petitioner then acquires degrees of M.Phil and Ph.d during her service and now holds M.Lib., M.Phil. and Ph.D. The petitioner