1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2004 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.GURURAJAN WRIT PETITION NOS.9468-80/2004(S-REG) BETWEEN: 1. Yashoda T.K W/o.Late B.S. Eshwarappa A/a 35 years. 2. Tippu S/o Basappa A/a 30 years. 3. Neelamma W/o Gopala A/a 30 years. 4. Rani W/o Jayaram A/a 30 years. 5. Gowramma W/o Chandrappa A/a 30 years. 6. Thungamma *W/o Late Sri.Manjappa A/a 30 years. 7. Parvathi.A W/o Yogendra A/a 35 years. * corrected vide Court order dated 06.04.2022 2 8. Shiva B S/o Rangappa A/a 30 years. 9. K. Basavanna Gowda S/o Shanthaveerappa A/a 30 years. 10. M. Siddhappa S/o Kenchappa A/a 30 years. 11. L. Manjaiah S/o Lakkanna A/a 38 years. 12. Gowramma W/o Revanna A/a 35 years. 13. Nagamma B W/o Kenchappa A/a 45 years. ...PETITIONERS All are working as Daily Rated Employees in Agricultural Research Station, Nevile, Shimoga. (By Sri.I.Taranath Poojary, Adv.,) AND: 1. State of Karnataka Rep. By its Secretary Dept. of Agriculture and Horticulture, M.S. Building Bangalore. 2. State of Karnataka Rep. By its Under Secretary Dept of Personal and 3 Administrative Reforms Vidhana Soudha Bangalore. 3. University of Agricultural Science G.K.V.K. Bangalore Rep. by its Registrar. 4. The Vice Chancellor University of Agriculture Science G.K.V.K. Campus Bangalore. 5. The Farm Superintendent Agriculture Research Station Nevile, Shimoga. ...RESPONDENTS (By Sri.Basavarajaiah, HCGP for R1 and 2 Sri.M.Srinivas, Adv. For R3, 4 and 5) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners vide Ann.D in terms of the Judgment of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.Nos.13858-67/2000 dated 31.03.2003 (Ann.B) and regularize their services with this retrospective effect on completion of 10 years continuous service along with all consequential benefits. These petitions coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following: 4 O R D E R The petitioners are before me seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in terms of the Judgment of this Court in W.P.Nos.13858-67/2000 dated 31.3.2003 in the matter of regularisation. 2. The petitioner has stated the material facts in the body of the petition. According to the petitioners, they are entitled for the benefit of the Judgment in terms of the Judgment of this Court in W.P.Nos.13858-67/2000 dated 31.03.2003. In the light of the Judgment of this Court, according to the petition averments, they have given a representation in terms of Annexure ‘D’. They say that the same remains not considered. They are before me. 3. Heard Sri.Tharanath Poojary, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners. 5 4. At my instance, Sri.Srinivas, learned Counsel accepts notice for respondents 3, 4 and 5. 5. Sri.Basavarajaiah, learned GP accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2. 6. After hearing the learned Counsel, I am of the view that it is unnecessary for me to express any opinion on the merits of the matter in the light of the pending representation in terms of Annexure ‘D’. In the given circumstances, I deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider Annexure ‘D’ on its merits and in accordance with law including the applicability of the Judgment of this Court in W.P.Nos.13858-67/2000 dated 31.03.2003 or any other Judgment rendered subsequently and pass orders within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No opinion is expressed on the merits of the matter. 6 7. Ordered accordingly. 8. Sri.Srinivas, learned Counsel and Sri.Basavarajaiah, learned GP are given four weeks time to file their memos of appearance. Sd/- JUDGE nas.