VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

Sri B R Venugopal v. The Commissioner

ALLOWED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
14 January 2026
Bench
H.T. Narendra Prasadauthor
Case no.
WP 19371/2023

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow H.T. Narendra Prasad

Judgment

NC:(2026:KHC:2401( WP(No.(19371(of(2023( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(14 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(H.T.(NARENDRA(PRASAD( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(19371(OF(2023((S-RES)( BETWEEN:(( ,

SRI,B,R,VENUGOPAL, S/O,LATE,B,M,RAMAPPA, AGED,ABOUT,56,YEARS,

NO.632,,2ND,CROSS,,2ND,MAIN, BEML,LAYOUT,,3RD,STAGE, RAJARAJESHWARI,NAGAR,

BENGALURU-560098, …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,SOMASHEKHARAIAH,R,P.,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( ,

1., THE,COMMISSIONER, BHRUHATH,BENGALURU,MANANAGARA,PALIKE, NR,SQUARE,,BENGALURU-560002.,

Digitallytisignedtiby , MALATHI0CHALUVA2., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER, IYENGAR ADMINISTRATION, Location:0HIGH BHRUHATH,BENGALURU,MANANAGARA,PALIKE,COURTOF KARNATAKA NR,SQUARE,,BENGALURU-560002., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SANJEEV,B,L.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R1,&,R2), , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, ENDORSEMENT, DATED:, 15.07.2023, IN, NUMBER, B12(1G)PR/22/2023-24,ISSUED,BY,THE,RESPONDENT,UNDER, ANNEXURE-J,AND,ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the endorsement dated 15.07.2023 issued by respondent No.2 (vide Annexure-J), whereby the request of the petitioner for regularization of his service with effect from 06.02.1995 has been rejected.

¶2The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed in the Corporation as a daily wage employee on

25.07.1983. Thereafter, he was removed from service pursuant to the order dated 23.12.1985. Aggrieved by the same, he approached this Court by filing C.P.No.79/1993. This Court, by order dated 18.03.1993, passed the following order: "3. The contention of the petitioners is that they are being employed by the respondent Corporation on daily wages basis and their services

may be regularized on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in the DHARWAD DISTRICT P.W.D. LITERATE DAILY WAGES EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA (AIR 1990 S.C. 883) and the consequent Government Orders directing authorities concerned to give effect to the directions of the Supreme Court. In the circumstances, the respondents are directed to consider the cases of petitioners also if they are entitled to the benefit of either the decision of the Supreme Court cited supra or the Circular issued by Government for regularization within a period of three months from today."

¶3In spite of the aforesaid directions, as the petitioner was not taken back to duty, he filed a contempt petition in C.C.C. No.1017/1994. Thereafter, he was reinstated into service on 06.02.1995, as evidenced by Annexure-A. His service was subsequently regularized by order dated 17.01.2006 (vide Annexure-B).

¶4The case of the petitioner is that he is entitled to regularization of his service with effect from 06.02.1995,

hence, he submitted a representation dated 18.03.2022 vide Annexure-H to the respondents. As the said representation was not considered, petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.1153/2022. This Court, by order dated

01.03.2023, directed respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law.

¶5Thereafter, the second respondent issued the impugned endorsement vide Annexure-J, rejecting the request of the petitioner. While issuing the endorsement at Annexure-J, the respondent failed to consider the order passed by this Court in C.P.No.79/1993, disposed of on

18.03.1993. Therefore, the matter requires to be remitted back to the respondents for fresh reconsideration.

¶6Accordingly, the following order is passed:

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) The endorsement dated 15.07.2023 issued by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-J is quashed.

(iii) The respondents are directed to reconsider representation submitted by petitioner dated 18.03.2022 (vide Annexure-H), in accordance with law, keeping in view of the earlier order passed by this Court in C.P.No.79/1993, disposed of on 18.03.1993, within three months from date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 36

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.