Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sri.Jayakumar.S vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Jayakumar.S vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Nov 04, 2025
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1693201

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Karnataka High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/28088/2014

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sri.Jayakumar.S

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....cause absorption of their services in rdpr department of state of karnataka from the date of their initial joining rdpr with all consequential benefits including the monetary beneftis flowing there from, quash the order dt.7.6.14, ann-e, passed by the r4, chief executive officer, zilla panchayat chitradurga so far as petitioner no.4 is concerned and grant interim order to status quo regarding petitioners present working. this petition, coming on for orders, this day,order was made therein as under:-5- coram: hon'ble mr. justice ashok s.kinagioral orderlearned counsel for the petitioners filed a memo seeking leave of this court to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents, seeking for regularisation in terms of thejudgment passed by the hon'ble apex court in the casesof jaggo v. union of india and others, in slp (civil) no.5580/2024, dharam singh & ors. vs. state of u.p. & anr. in civil appeal no.8558/2018 and shripal & anr. v. nagar nigam, ghaziabad, in civil appeal no.2. the memo is placed on record.3. accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. -6-4. liberty is reserved to the petitioners to make arepresentation within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. if such a representation is made, the respondents are directed to consider the representations in terms of the proposition laid down by the hon'ble apex court in the cases of jaggo, dharam singh and shripal (supra) within two months from the date of receipt of the representation and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.5. all the contentions of the parties are kept open. sd/- (ashok s.kinagi) judge ssb

Full Judgment

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 28088 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN:

1. SRI.JAYAKUMAR.S S/O SRI.A. SAMUEL AGE:51 YEARS

2. SRI. A.R. DATTATRI S/O SRI. N.RAMAIAH AGE: 52 YEARS

3. SRI. Y. MARKANDEYA

S/O SRI. Y.BASANNA, Digitally signed by 4. SRI. R. SHEIK AHAMED SUNITHA K S S/O SRI.ABDUL RAHIM, Location: HIGH COURT AGE: 51 YEARS, OF KARNATAKA 5. SRI. S.MURTUZA ALI S/O SRI.SYED MIR ALI,

6. SRI. S. VEERANNA S/O SRI.MADIWALAPPA SURYE, AGE: 54 YEARS, -2-

7. SRI. M.H. BHASKAR S/O LATE S. HANUMANTHA SHETTY, AGE: 51 YEARS,

8. SRI. BASAVARAJA YELABURGI S/O SRI. SHEKHARAPPA,

9. SRI. G.R. SRINIVASA S/O SRI. G.S. RAMAIAH,

10. SRI. G. L. BADI S/O SRI.L.R. BADI

11. SRI. M.S. SUDARSHAN S/O SRI.M.R.SRINIVASA RAO, AGE: 51 YEARS,

12. SRI. KRISHNA S/O SRI.K.S.SHASTRI, AGE: 48 YEARS

13. SRI. N. NAGESHA S/O LATE SRI.NINGEGOWDA,

14. SRI. S.B. KAMATAGI S/O SRI.BABURAO, AGE: 43 YEARS,

15. SRI. NANJUNDE GOWDA S/O SRI.MUDALAGIRI GOWDA, AGE: 47 YEARS, -3-

PETITIONERS 1 TO 15 ARE APPOINTED AS PROJECT ASSISTANT BY THE KARNATAKA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, BANGALORE:560 012, NOW ON DEPUTATION TO RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE:560 001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P A KULKARNI ., ADV.) AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M.S.BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001.

2. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (SERVICES), GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE:560 001.

3. KARNATAKA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY WITH ITS HEADQUARTERS AT INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE PREMISES BANGALORE:560 012, BY ITS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY. -4-

4. ZILLA PANCHAYATH

CHITRADURGA-577502 BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.K.ESHWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 & R2, SRI. PRADEEP SAWKAR, ADV. FOR R3, SRI. C.SHIVAKUMAR, ADV. FOR R4) THIS WP FILED PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CAUSE ABSORPTION OF THEIR SERVICES IN RDPR DEPARTMENT OF STATE OF KARNATAKA FROM THE DATE OF THEIR INITIAL JOINING RDPR WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS INCLUDING THE MONETARY BENEFTIS FLOWING THERE FROM, QUASH THE ORDER DT.7.6.14, ANN-E, PASSED BY THE R4, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYAT CHITRADURGA SO FAR AS PETITIONER NO.4 IS CONCERNED AND GRANT INTERIM ORDER TO STATUS QUO REGARDING PETITIONERS PRESENT WORKING. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

-5- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents, seeking for regularisation in terms of the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases

of JAGGO V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, IN SLP (CIVIL) NO.5580/2024, DHARAM SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8558/2018 AND SHRIPAL & ANR. V. NAGAR NIGAM, GHAZIABAD, IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.

2. The memo is placed on record.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. -6-

4. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to make a

representation within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. If such a representation is made, the respondents are directed to consider the representations in terms of the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of JAGGO, DHARAM SINGH AND SHRIPAL (Supra) within two months from the date of receipt of the representation and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

5. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial