Karnataka High Court
WA/950/2025 of KANTAYYA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, on 21 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:21519-DB WA No. 950 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 950 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. KANTAYYA SON OF CHANABASAYYA PURANIK
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT APPEAL NO. 950 OF 2025 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
KANTAYYA
SON OF CHANABASAYYA
PURANIK MATH
AGED 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT JAVA ROAD,
AZAD CIRCLE, KOPPAL 583231
2.
SAGAR TULSIDAS PADWALKAR
SON OF TULSIDAS
AGED 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT HOSALI, PO ANGADI,
KARWAR UTTARKANNADA - 581360
3.
SMT. D SHANTA LAKSHMI
WIFE OF V SATHISH
AGED 54 YEARS
RESIDING AT SRI DATA NILAYA,
1ST MAIN, 1ST PARALLEL ROAD,
4TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR WEST
TUMKUR - 572102
4.
SMT. HEMALATHA M S
WIFE OF SHASHI KANTHA MP
AGED 37 YEARS
RESIDING AT LIG 76, KHB COLONY
KALKUNIKE HUNSUR TALUK,
MYSURU 571105
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
5.
SMT. SAVITHA T HEGDE
WIFE OF MAHABALESHWAR B.R.
AGED 54 YEARS
RESIDING AT D NO. 1163,
CH 5/1, BAJANNA LANE CHAMARAJAPURAM,
MYSURU 570005
6.
SMT. CHIKKATHAI B
WIFE OF NAGARAJ M
AGED 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO. 2492,
5TH CROSS, KG KOPPAL
MYSURU 571105
7.
SMT REKHATAI BAPURAO KULKARNI
CARE OF SANJEEV S DESHPANDE
AGED 50 YEARS
RESIDING AT PLOT NO 32,
GANESH NAGAR, NEAR PAND T QUARTS,
OLD JAWARI ROAD, GULBARGA 585102
8.
ROOPESH C M
SON OF MR. C M MAHADEVAPPA
AGED 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO. 20/206,
KUMBARA STREET
CHAMARAJ NAGAR 571313
9.
N D KAMANNA
SON OF DODDAIAH
AGED 47 YEARS
RESIDING AT VILLAGE NAVILU KURIKE
PO AGRAHARA, KORATAGERE,
TUMKUR 572129
10.
DHARAMANNNA
SON OF RAMANNA BESTAR
AGED 31 YEARS
RESIDING AT DEVRAJ ARAS COLONY
KOPPAL 583231
HC-KAR
11.
SMT. H E LALITHA
WIFE OF NAGARAJ H Y
AGED 45 YEARS
RESIDING AT BABBU NIVAS,
GANDHI NAGAR, VIRAJPET TALUK,
KODAGU 571218
12.
R SHRIKANT
SON OF T S RAJU
AGED 39 YEARS
RESIDING AT DR NO. 16/10,
MANGALA DEVI NAGAR MADIKERI,
KODAGU
13.
UMESH K
SON OF KEMPAIAH,
AGED 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT HONNALI ROAD,
CHOWDESHWARI COLONY,
SHIMOGA 577201
14.
D RAJASHEKAR
SON OF LATE P.M. DWARAKANATHA
CARE OF KUPPANNA,
AGED 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT NEAR JAGADAMBA TEMPLE,
VIDYANAGAR SHIMOGA 577203
15.
SHIVARAJA
SON OF UPENDRA M
AGED 32 YEARS
RESIDING AT ASHOKA ROAD,
ANANDAPURAM, SAGAR TQ,
SHIMOGA - 577412
16.
KUMAR SHIVAPUTRA PASCHAPURE
SON OF SHIVAPUTRA PASCHAPURE
AGED 34 YEARS
RESIDING AT H NO. 46,
LAXMI NAGAR,
AT/PO BELKUD,
HC-KAR
CHIKODI BALAGAVI 591222
17.
MALLESH YAMANAPPA WAGGE
SON OF YAMANAPPA
AGED 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT BUDHA NAGAR,
NEAR B K COLLEGE CHIKODI,
BELAGAVI 591201
18.
SMT. VAISHALI SHIVAJI KAMBLE
DAUGHTER OF SHIVAJI KAMBLE
AGED 40 YEARS
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.25,
SECTOR NO.5, 4TH CROSS
SHRINAGAR BELGAVI 590001
19.
MAHANTESH SIDDAPPA SANKAL
SON OF SIDAPPA
AGED 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT APMC ROAD,
GANDHI NAGAR, GOKAK,
BELGAVI 591222
20.
RAMACHANDRA VASANTRAO INDIKAR
SON OF VASANTRAO INDIKAR
AGED 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT H NO. 36,
KSRTC COLONY, BAGALKOT ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR
21.
PRAKASH HANAMANT KATTIMANI
SON OF HANAMANT
AGED 47 YEARS
RESIDING AT DARBAR GALLI,
BHIDE CHAWL, SUNAND BATTI,
BAGALKOT ROAD, VIJAYAPUR - 586101
22.
MOHAMMED ARIF ABIBUSMAN NEGINAL
SON OF ABIBUSMAN NEGINAL
AGED 35 YEARS
RESIDING AT KATAKANA HALLI,
HC-KAR
VIJAYAPUR 586102
23.
JAYAPAL B PARASAPPAGAL
SON OF BALAPPA
AGED 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT POST BELVI, HUKKERI,
BELAGAVI 591309
24.
ARAVIND ASHOK UPADHYE
SON OF ASHOK UPADHYE
AGED 43 YEARS
CARE OF JOSHI BUILDING,
NEAR GOWRI TEMPLE
AT PO/TQ BASAVAN BAGEWADI
VIJAYAPUR - 586203
25.
RAMESH ADIVEPPA NAIKAR
SON OF ADIVEPPA NAIKAR
AGED 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT KURUBARA ONI YARAGUPPI,
KUNDAGOL DHARWAD - 580023
26.
SMT. SHALINI G S
DAUGHTER OF SOMASHEKAR G.V.
AGED 34 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO. 257, 6A CROSS
MARUTHI BADAVANE,
CHOKKASANDRA, BENGALURU 560058
27.
SMT. MAHANTAMMA MUPPAYYA HIREMATH,
DAUGHTER OF MUYAPPA HIREMANTH,
AGED 48 YEARS
CARE OF SIDDARAMAYYA ALLAYYA
SHIVAPPAYYANAMATH,
WARD NO.3, NEKAR-ONI, BADAMI,
BAGALKOT - 587201
28.
MALLAPPA NINGAPPA PUJARI
AGED 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT POST CHIKKAMANUR INDI,
VIJAPUR
HC-KAR
29.
KRISHNA
S/O LATE MADE GOWDA
AGED 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 40,
KONANA KUNTE GANESH TEMPLE ROAD
BENGALURU 560062
30.
NARAYANA
S/O LATE DASAIAH
AGED 54 YEARS
RESIDING AT HULLIVADI VILLAGE,
MANKUNDA POST,
CHANNAPATNA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA 562108
31.
K M SATHISH
S/O LATE K N MALLANNA
AGED 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NAGATHARPETE NEAR
NAGARESHWARA TEMPLE
ANEKAL TOWN
32.
K S PANKAJA
W/O ANNAJI RAO N V
AGED 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 477/3,
SARDAR STREET, NEAR BASAVANA KATTE,
ATTIBELE, ANEKAL TQ
BANGALORE RURAL 562107
33.
T SHIVARAJ KUMAR
S/O THIMMANNA
AGED 32 YEARS
RESIDING AT POST GANNAYAKANAHALLI, (V)
HIRIYUR, CHITRADURGA
34.
H P CHIDAMBARAM
S/O TD PUTTASOMAIAH
AGED 39 YEARS
RESIDING AT AT DYAVARANAHALLI,
HC-KAR
DEVARAMARIKUNTE POST
CHALLAKERE, CHITADURGA 577538
35.
D A NARASIMHA PRASAD
S/O D L ANAND RAO
RESIDING AT NO. 1491,
KUCHAPPANAPETE DODDABALLAPUR,
BANGALORE RURAL 561203
36.
SANTHOSH A J
S/O JANARDHANACHAR A L
AGED 37 YEARS
CARE OF KALYANI V
NO. 193, 4TH MAIN ROAD BATAWADI
(NEAR MATHA ACID) TUMKUR - 572103
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. AKSHAY KUMAR JAIN V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY
AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
2.
THE REGISTRAR GENERAL,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA 560001
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1; S.S.NAGANAND, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. SUMANA NAGANAND., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL
AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04/03/2025 PASSED BY
THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP
NO.25348/2023
AND
CONSEQUENTLY
ALLOW
THE
WP
NO.25348/2023 AS PRAYED THEREON, ETC.
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.25348/2023 (S-RES), filed by the appellants herein. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants seeking regularization of their services in the District Judiciary/Fast Track Courts.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.
3. The petitioners were appointed on contractual basis with consolidated monthly pay initially for a period of 3 months in the Fast Track Courts created in the states in the year 2009. The petitioners had continued as contractual employees on consolidated payment basis till
HC-KAR
the abolition of the Fast Track Courts in the years 2013 and 2015. As a result of abolition of the Fast Track Courts the services of the petitioners, who were on contractual basis getting consolidated pay also came to be dispensed with. The petitioners' representations for regularization came to be rejected by the High Court vide Order dated 05.04.2023 (Annexure-A) and the said endorsement has been challenged by the petitioners by filing the writ petitions.
4. The learned Single Judge having considered the nature of employment and the fact that the Fast Track Courts came to be abolished, has dismissed the writ petitions as in view of the writ Court, there cannot be any direction for absorption of the petitioners services in the District Judiciary when their employment was on contractual basis on consolidated pay.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants/petitioners has submitted that the appellants have put in around 10 to
HC-KAR
13 years/considerable period of service in the District Judiciary, inasmuch as they were appointed between 2003 and 2012. Some of the petitioners have crossed more than 60 years of age as of now, and after abolition of the Fast Track Courts, their services have come to an end. He further submits that petitioners' claim for absorption could have been considered against the regular vacancies, which are existing in the District Judiciary by the High Court. However, vide endorsement their request for regularization has been turned down only on the ground that the petitioners' services were purely on contractual basis/temporary basis. He submits that a direction be issued by the High Court to absorb the services of the petitioners for regular services by framing a scheme.
6. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants. We need to consider the nature of employment of the petitioners in the Fast Track Courts, which would be reflected from the appointment orders issued to the petitioners. We are taking note of the
HC-KAR
terms and conditions of one of the appointment orders i.e. 02.08.2004. The appointment orders specifically mentions that the candidates are selected and appointed purely on contractual and temporary basis on consolidated pay and posted as such, in the Courts mentioned against their names. It was further made very categorically clear that the appointments were purely contractual/temporary basis and would be terminated at any point of time, without notice to the candidates and the candidates would not have any right to continue in service.
7. Thus, from the appointment order itself, it was made known to the petitioners that their services were purely contractual/temporary basis on a consolidated pay as the remuneration and they would not have any claim for confirmation etc. This offer was accepted by the petitioners and therefore, once they had accepted the offer of appointment on the aforesaid conditions, now they cannot stage a claim for their absorption/regularization, once the Fast Track Courts came to be abolished and as a
HC-KAR
result thereof, the contractual employment of the petitioners on consolidated pay/remuneration came to an end.
8. We find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, which is why we dismiss this writ appeal.
9. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any do not survive for consideration, hence stand disposed of.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
NG CT: SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7