Back
SRI. NITYANANDA – Appellant
Versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER – Respondent
WP 33892/2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.33892/2018 (S-RES)
BETWEEN
SRI NITYANANDA
S/O SRI KRISHNA DEVADIGA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
KAMBALAGUTTU, BOLA,
KARKALA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI CHANDRANATH ARIGA K., ADVOCATE (VIDEO
CONFERENCING))
AND
1.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
KUNDAPURA SUB-DIVISION,
KUNDAPURA 3 576 022.
UDUPI DISTRICT.
2.
THE TAHASHILDAR
KARKALA TALUK,
KARKALA 3 574 104.
UDUPI DISTRICT.
3.
SRI PRAVEEN MOOLYA
S/O BOJA MOOLYA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
BATTABETTU HOUSE,
POST: BOLA VILLAGE,
2
KARKALA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI AJAYA PRABHU, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SACHING B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 9.7.2018 PASSED BY R-1 VIDE
ANNEX-D; DISMISS THE APPEAL IN R.A.NO. 453/2018 ON
THE FILE OF THE R-1.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED
FOR
ORDERS,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING :-
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition calls in question
an order dated 09-07-2018, by which the Appellate
Authority sets aside the appointment of the petitioner to
the post of Gram Sahayak and remands the matter back
to the hands of the Tahsildar for re-consideration.
2. Heard Sri Chandranath Ariga K., learned
Advocate
appearing
for
the
petitioner,
Smt. M.C. Nagashree, learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 3 and Sri
3
Ajay Prabhu, learned Advocate for Sri Sachin B.S.,
learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.3.
3. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the
present petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as
follows:-
One Manjappa Devadiga, who was working as
Gram Sahayak in Bola village, not being able to perform
his duties due to his old age, resigns from the services.
After resignation, one Suneel Devadiga, son of the
resigned Gram Sahayak - Manjappa Devadiga, submits
a representation dated 12.09.2017, that he is entitled to
the post of Gram Sahayak, he is not interested in the
post and therefore, the post of Gram Sahayak be offered
to one Nithyananda Devadiga, who is the son of Krishna
Devadiga, the brother of the resigned employee -
Manjappa Devadiga.
4
4. The said representation is again reiterated
dated
13.11.2017.
On
the
basis
of
the
said
representations, the Tahsildar after examining the
matter, issued an endorsement appointing the petitioner
as Gram Sahayak of the aforesaid village on the score
that he has conducted an interview of the petitioner.
5. The order of appointment depicted certain
conditions as could be found in the order that the
appointment is temporary and the petitioner should
undertake to perform any of the jobs that are entrusted
to him by the Superiors and the said appointment was
issued in terms of the Government Order dated
16.09.1978. This was called in question by the 3rd
respondent by filing an appeal in R.A.No.453/2018,
before the 1st respondent/Assistant Commissioner
contending that the petitioner is not a resident of Bola
Gram Panchayat and in terms of the Circular pursuant
to which the appointment is made, requires that the
5
appointee shall be a resident of the very Gram
Panchayat. The petitioner claims to have filed a counter
affidavit
depicting
his
qualification.
The
1st
respondent/Assistant Commissioner passed an order
dated 09.07.2018, setting aside the appointment of the
petitioner and remitted the matter back to the hands of
the Tahsildar to redo the entire process. The order of
the Assistant Commissioner reads as follows:
<-:DzÉñÀ:-
ªÉÄîä£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀeÁUÉƽ¹zÉ. DzÀgÉ vÀºÀ²Ã¯ÁÝgÀgÀÄ PÁPÀð¼À
EªÀgÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÀ ¨ÉÆüÀ U
