KAHC010211662021_1

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

Background: The case involves multiple writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka. The petitioners are individuals who had applied for appointments through the Karnataka Public Service Commission in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, likely for the post of Drug Controller or similar. They were aggrieved by the selection process or the final select list, and had approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT) seeking relief. The KSAT rejected their applications, leading to the present writ petitions. Facts: The petitioners in WP No.10575/2021 are numerous individuals from various districts of Karnataka. They filed applications before KSAT (Application Nos. 5773-5786/2020, 6990/2020, 6922-6928/2020, 6516/2020, 856/2021, 6495/2020) challenging the recruitment process. The KSAT passed an order dated 12/05/2021 dismissing these applications. Similarly, petitioner in WP No.17163/2021 filed Application No.6560/2019, which was dismissed by the KSAT on 24/08/2021. The writ petitions were filed to set aside these tribunal orders and to grant the relief sought originally. Legal Issues: The precise legal issues are not recorded in the available text, but they likely pertain to the correctness of the selection process, eligibility criteria, or reservation policy. Arguments: The petitioners were represented by learned senior counsel who canvassed common grounds. The respondents (KPSC, State Government, and private respondents who were selected candidates) opposed the petitions. The court heard all sides. Court’s Analysis: The available text does not contain the court’s reasoning. It only notes that the court heard the learned senior counsel for all parties. Decision: The text ends without recording the final order. Hence, the outcome of the writ petitions remains unstated in the provided excerpt.

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010211662021_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (03) 52

Writ Petition No. 10575 of 2021 (S-KSAT) c/w Writ Petition No. 17163 of 2021 (S-KSAT)

2023-03-31

Justice G.Narendar, Justice Shivashankar Amaranavar

Sri. Aditya Sondhi, Senior Counsel for Sri. Shahnawaz M. Mahadapur, Advocate for petitioners in WP 10575; Sri. Sandesh J. Chouta, Senior Counsel for Sriyuths Raghu H and Shakeer Abbas M, Advocates for petitioner in WP 17163; Sri. Reuben Jacob, Senior Counsel for Sri. Pawan Kumar M.N, Advocate for KPSC; Sri. Dhyan Chinnappa, Additional Advocate General along with Smt. Shilpa S. Gogi, HCGP for State; Sri. Udaya Holla, Senior Counsel for Sri. M.S. Rajendra, Advocate for Respondent 4 to 58; Smt. Aruna P. Chavan, Advocate for Respondent 59

Harsha N, Suresh N, Mahesh Patil, Prasanna Kumar R, Krishnamurthy V, Prashanth Patil, Revanasiddappa, Shri Shrishailappa Malgi, Dushyanth H S, Naveen Kumar B, Vijayakumar, Siddramappa Patil, Badarinath Bevinakatti, Sanjeevakumar Dattatreya Bijapur, M D Maheboob Pathan, Sunil Kumar K, Shankarappa Janiwarad, Mahesh N S

The Karnataka Public Service Commission, The State of Karnataka, The Controller for the State of Karnataka Department of Drugs Control, and others (Kiran Kumar M, Shashidhar Ranjanagi, Sanjaya Kumar D.S, Nissara Ahammed, Omprakash N.P, Basavaraja Chandrashekara Doddamani, Pramod Patil, Ganesh Nazare, Srinivas Murthy H, Kirankumar Navdae, Neeta V Gyanappanavar, Umashankar C, Shivakumar, Rakesh, Prakash L, Ramya V, Nagaraja G, Vrashabha Magadum, Vinodkumar Chavan, Dimple Pirgal, Krishna Patil, Radhika Kandoori, Sarala T.S, Shweta G Hosur, Kushal Y Hukkeri, Poornima C, Chetan Seetharam Harekal, S Venkatesha, Tejawini C, Raghu R, Ravikumar Mudhol, Niramala V, Channabasavaraja, Pattari Lothitha, Manjuthej T.R, Prema M.K, Veeresh, Krishna Jadhav, Imran, Abilash, G Naresh, Vitthal Sanganal, J.M. Manjula, Pragathi N.A, Madhusudan, Bhavya Kumari L.G, G.Maruthi, Mamatha M, Dawood Ulla Baig, Sarojaddin, Patil Shivaraman, Manjunatha, Basavaraj Pujar, Manjunath, Gouse Basha B, Nanu Rathod)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging orders of Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal dismissing petitions related to recruitment for Drug Controller post.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to quash the KSAT orders dated 12/05/2021 and 24/08/2021 and allow their original applications before the tribunal.

Filing Reason

The petitioners were aggrieved by the rejection of their applications by KSAT challenging the selection process conducted by KPSC.

Previous Decisions

The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal dismissed Application Nos. 5773-5786/2020, 6990/2020, 6922-6928/2020, 6516/2020, 856/2021, 6495/2020 on 12/05/2021, and Application No. 6560/2019 on 24/08/2021.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard the learned Senior counsel Sri Aditya Sondhi for the petitioners in W.P.No.10575/2021 and the learned Senior counsel Sri Sandesh Chouta for the petitioners in W.P. No.17163/2021 and the learned Senior counsel Sri Reuben Jacob for respondent No.1, learned AAG Sri Dhyan Chinnappa along with Smt. Shilpa S Gogi, learned HCGP for respondent No.2 and Sri Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 58 and Smt. Aruna P Chavan, learned counsel for respondent No.59. As both writ petitions are canvassed on common grounds of fact and law, both petitions are taken up for consideration by this common order. The petitioners are before this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the KSAT, Bengaluru whereby the Hon’ble Tribunal was pleased to reject the applicati...

Procedural History

The petitioners filed applications before KSAT challenging the selection process for Drug Controller posts. The KSAT dismissed the applications on 12/05/2021 (in WP 10575) and 24/08/2021 (in WP 17163). Aggrieved, the petitioners filed the instant writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 before the High Court of Karnataka. The court heard arguments from both sides.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court KAHC010211662021_1
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Union's Petition Alleging Unfair Labour Practice by Employer. Company's denial of permanency to 15 workmen held not to constitute unfair labour practice under Item 6 of Schedule IV of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 as workmen faile...