ORDER

Petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 is assailing the order dated 15.09.2023 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.2 and Endorsement dated 15.09.1923 (Annexure-N) interalia sought for direction to the respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Library Supervisor in the respondent-Panchayat.

2. In R.P.No.542 of 2023, petitioner is seeking review of the order dated 09.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.15062 of 2021. Petitioner in R.P.No.542 of

2023 is respondent No.5 in W.P.No.24532 of 2023.

3. Relevant facts for the adjudication of these petitions are that, the respondent-Panchayat had called for application from the eligible candidates for the post of Library Supervisor of Nusgere Village Grama Panchayat, and the said respondent-Panchayat has selected the review petitioner-Smt. Anitha T., and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 has filed W.P.No.15062 of 2021 before this Court challenging the selection of the respondent No.5-Smt. Anitha T. This court by order dated 09.06.2023, in W.P.No.15062 of 2021 allowed the writ petition and as such, quashed the appointment of the review petitioner-Smt. Anitha .T. Thereafter, the petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 has approached the respondent-authorities to consider his case for post of Library Supervisor and the respondent-Zilla Panchayat, rejected the claim made by the petitioner as per notification and Endorsement dated 15.09.2023 (Annexures-M and N respectively). Therefore, the petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 has questioned the notification and Endorsement dated

15.09.2023 (Annexures-M and N).

4. Review petitioner in R.P.No.542 of 2023 has challenged the order dated 09.06.2023 in W.P.No.15062 of 2021 on the ground that, the Rule 9(1)(c) of KCSR (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977 stipulates that, a candidate claiming selection under the category of Kannada Medium should have studied Class-1 to 10 in Kannada Medium and therefore, sought for review of the order dated 09.06.2023 in W.P.No.15062 of 2021.

5. I have heard Sri.M. Babu Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 and Sri. Kalyan R., learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner in R.P.No.542 of 2023; Sri Somayaji, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Panchayat authorities.

6. Sri M. Babu Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.24532 of 2023 contended that, as this court has quashed appointment of the respondent No.5 in W.P.No.15062 of 2021 and therefore, the respondent-panchayat, ought to have appointed the petitioner for the post of Library Supervisor on merit, taking into account the fact that, the petitioner has scored more than the selected candidate (review petitioner) and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court.

7. Sri R Kalyan learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner contended that, the review petitioner was served but unrepresented in W.P.No.15062 of 2021 and accordingly, sought for review of the said order dated 09.06.2023.

8. It is the contention of the Sri. R.Kalyan that, as per the provisions under Rule 9 (1)(c) of the Rules, the candidate claiming selection must studied in Kannada Medium from Class 1 to 10 Standard and therefore, the finding recorded by this court in W.P.No.15062 of 2021 is incorrect and accordingly, sought for review of order dated 09.06.2023 in W.P.No.15062 of 2021. It is further contention of Sri.R.Kalyan that, the review petitioner has been rightly appointed to the post of Library Supervisor in the respondent-Panchayat and same has to be confirmed.

9. Sri Somayaji, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Panchayat, placed the original records containing the advertisement dated 03.10.2020 made by the respondent-Panchayat, inviting applications for the post of Library Supervisor and he submitted that, the review petitioner has studied in Kannada Medium from Class-1 to Class-10 Standard which is qualifying examination prescribed for the post and same is in terms of the Rules