IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 22568 OF 2025 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

M. N. VENKATESH S/O. NAGENDRA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, DAILY WAGE TYPIST, TALUK PANCHAYAT, THIRTHAHALLI - 577 432, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALIDHAR K.B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYAT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.

Digitally signed …RESPONDENT by SHARADAVANI B (BY SRI. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT N, ADVOCATE)

Location: High Court of Karnataka THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO BEARING NO. ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT JI.PAM.SHI/ AADALITA (1) VI, VA-35/ 2013-14 /2022-23 DATED 17.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE T) HOLDING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND ARBITRARY ONE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

“i) Issue WRIT OF CERTIORARI, quashing the Impugned Endorsement bearing No. Ji.Pam.Shi/ Aadalita (1) Vi.Va-35/ 2013-14 /2022-23 dated 17.09.2022 issued by the Respondent (ANNEXURE -T) holding the same as illegal, bad in law and arbitrary one, in the interest of justice.

ii) Issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS, directing the Respondent to regularize the services of the Petitioner w.e.f. the date on which he has completed 10 years of Daily Wage Service, with all consequential service and monetary benefits, in the interest of justice and equity in the eye of law.

iii) Pass such other Order/orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and just in the matter in the interest of justice and equity in the eye of law.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner joined the respondent - Panchayat as typist on daily wage basis on 22.03.1989 and after a chequered history of litigation which ultimately culminated in WP No.51010/2012 dated 22.06.2022 vide Annexure - R, the request of the petitioner for regularisation has been rejected by the respondent by issuing the impugned endorsement on the ground that the petitioner continued in service on the basis of interim orders obtained by other identically/similarly situated persons in other petitions and as such, the petitioner was not entitled to regularisation.

4. In this context, it is pertinent to extract the Order in earlier round of litigation which culminated in WP No.51010/2012 dated 22.06.2022 as per Annexure - R, passed pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (cc) No.CC 4105-

4242/2005 dated 25.02.2008 vide Annexure - J as below;

Annexure J "ORDER Delay condoned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

We direct that in the light of para 53 of the decision of this Court in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors.Vs.Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC, 1 the case of these respondents, who have already completed more than 22 years of service, shall be individually examined by the authorities concerned. We hope and trust that the authorities will look into the individual cases and examine their continuation in services in terms of the schemes or other provisions of law on the subject available in the State. The authorities shall also take into consideration the law laid down by this Court in the case of U.P.State Electricity Board vs. Pooranchandra Pandey & others (2007) 7 SCC, 374. However, till the individual cases are not scruitinized by the authorities, these respondents -

incumbents will be allowed to continue service.

With the abovesaid observations, the special leave petitions stand disposed of."

Annexure - R "ORDER The petitioner stated to have been appointed as 'Typist' on daily wage basis on 22.03.1989 to the vacant post of Typist in the office of the Block Developme