Longstanding service in public roles warrants regularisation and cannot be arbitrarily denied based on technicalities; constitutional principles require fair treatment of employees.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to consider his case for regularisation of services in the cadre of Library Supervisor.

2. Heard Sri Girish V. Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP for respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 5.

3. The petitioner was appointed as a Library Supervisor pursuant to the communication of the Director of Public Libraries in respondent No. 4-Gram Panchayat on 09.06.1994. The qualifications required for the appointment of a Library Supervisor were subsequently changed in 2007, introducing a certification in Library Science courses.

4. The petitioner continues to work as a Library Supervisor in respondent No. 4. Nonetheless, he has since acquired the requisite qualification during his service and holds the certificate as required by law.

5. The issue is that the petitioner is now seeking regularisation of his services on the ground that he has completed 30 years of service.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Girish V. Bhat, would submit that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for regularisation in light of his 30 years of service to date, and that the respondents’ failure to consider his case has compelled the petitioner to seek a direction by way of a writ in the nature of mandamus.

7. The learned HCGP would refute the submission, contending that the petitioner was not appointed against a sanctioned vacant post and, therefore, is not even entitled to consideration for regularisation in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka & Others Vs. Uma Devi & Others, (2006) 4 SCC 1 .

8. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioner’s post was honorary in nature and did not belong to a sanctioned cadre.

9. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

10. Therefore, the above narrated facts are not in dispute. The dates of entry into service and continuance, which are admitted facts, are required to be noticed. The petitioner was appointed on 09.06.1994. The order of appointment is as follows:

11. The order of appointment came about pursuant to the Government Order which directed that every Panchayath should have a library and a post of Library Supervisor. The Government Order reads as follows:

ORDER NO. ED 81 KES 87. BANGALORE, DATED THE 7^TH JANUARY 1988

Sanction is accorded for expansion of the programmes of the Department of Public Libraries at a cost of Rs. 30 lakhs during 1987-88. Expansion of the programmes of the Department is confined to the following two issues:

a) To establish mandal libraries in a phased manner in the State at a cost of Rs. 10 lakhs.

b) Purchase Kannada books for Libraries at a cost of Rs. 20 lakhs.

The Department should ensure that these library centres at Mandal level be opened keeping in view of need and availability of rent free buildings. The Department is permitted to appoint caretaker for each Mandal Library at the rate of Rs. 800 p.m. as honorarium. Average expenditure for each Mandal Library is shown in the Annexure appended to this order.

Selection of books shall be made through the committee constituted for the purpose.

The expenditure for this new scheme shall not exceed the amount now released and it shall be debited to "2205 Artcle Culture -105-Public Libraries-10 Library Movement and Bulk purchase of books for Libraries (Plan) during 1987-88."

This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide No.FD 180/Exp.8/87 dated 28.12.1987.

By Order and in the memo of the

Governor of Karnataka

Sd/-

(M. PANKAJA)

Under Secret