IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

WRIT PETITION NO. 27834 OF 2023 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

APPASHI DHARMANNA GURAV

S/O DHARMANNA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

C/O NO 7/201

BIDARAGERE ROAD

BHANGIRAMAIAH LAYOUT

NEAR LAKSHMI TALKIES

D igitally

Signed by ANEKAL BENGALURU REKHA R URBAN DIST 562106.

Location :

High Court

AND ALSO AT

of

Karnataka JAKANUR VILLAGE

CHINAGUNDI POST

JAMAKHANDI TQ

BAGALKOT DIT 587301.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR K.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE RECRUITMENT AND TRIANING AND POLICE CONSTABLE APPOINTMENT COMMITTEE CARLTON BHAVANA PALACE ROAD BENGALURU 560001.

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MANGALURU CITY MANGALURU.

3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU 01.

4. GOVERNEMNT OF INDIA MINITRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (POLICE DIVISION II) RESETTLEMENT AND WELFARE DIRECTORATE NDCC II BUILDING

3^RD FLOOR JAI SINGH ROAD NEW DELHI 01.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V. SHIVA REDDY., AGA FOR R1 TO R3;

SRI. JAGADISH G KUMBAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES

226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.01.2023 BEING PASSED IN APPLICATION No. 3587/2022 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE -A; b) AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 14.07.2022 BEING PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT No. 2 VIDE ORDER No. SIBBANDI

2/27/COP/2021-22 VIDE ANNEXURE-A8.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD)

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated

11.01.2023 in Application No.3587/2022 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The Tribunal, by its impugned order dated 11.01.2023, has disposed of the petitioner's application directing the respondents to consider his representation dated 30.11.2022 and to take a decision on the petitioner's representation within four months. After the Tribunal's order, the second respondent has issued the Endorsement dated 19.07.2023 informing the petitioner that he cannot be extended the benefit of the subsequent Government Order dated 04.11.2022 because the Notification inviting applications for selection to the posts of 'Constable' is prior to this order.

2. The undisputed position is that in terms of Rule 9 of the Karnataka Civil Service [General Recruitment] Rules, 1977 [for short, '1977 Rules'], an Ex-serviceman as contemplated therein would be entitled for reservation in matters of recruitment with the State Government. The Tribunal, referring to this Rule, which remains unchanged even today, has opined that the petitioner who has retired from service with the Central Reserve Police Force would not qualify for reservation under that category. The petitioner is aggrieved by this observation and by the Endorsement issued by the second respondent on

19.07.2023.

3. The first respondent has issued Notification in May 2021 inviting applications to fill up posts of Constables stipulating that only those Ex- servicemen who have served with Defence Force would come under this category and those who have rendered services with Defense Security Cops or General Reserve Engineering Force or Para-Military Force would not. The petitioner, without calling in question this stipulation or the Rules that enable the stipulation, has participated in the selection process. The petitioner is part of the provisional selection list published on 01.02.2022 and he has also undergone medical test. The appointment orders have been issued to those selected on 26.04.2022, but not to the petitioner and he is issued with the Endorsement dated 14.07.2022 informing him that his candidature as an Ex-serviceman cannot be accepted. The petiti