IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NO.38963/2014 (S- DIS) BETWEEN:
SRI.M.C.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O CHIKKAHOBALAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO.63, K.E.B.
NEW QUARTERS, 32ND CROSS 19TH MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010 (BY SRI.K.SRINIVASA, ADV.) AND:
1. THE DIRECTOR (A & HR) KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CO. LTD. CAUVERY BHAVAN BENGALURU – 560 009 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER BESCOM, CORPORATE OFFICE K.R.CIRCLE BENGALURU – 560 001 ... PETITIONER 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE.) BESCOM, DIVISION OFFICE NO.6, 7TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 034 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.C.B.POORNIMA, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3; SRI.H.S.HOLLA, ADV. FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 20.02.2013 VIDE ANNEXURE – J AND TO REINSTATE THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OF GANGMEN AND CONSEQUENTLY TO ABSORB HIS SERVICES AS PROBATIONARY MAZDOOR TO BE EFFECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF SIX YEARS OF INITIAL SERVICE AND TO GRANT ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS INCLUDING THE ARREARS OF SALARY, SENIORITY AND PROMOTION.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner who claims to be the temporary gangmen is before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 20.02.2013 vide Annexure ‘J’ and to reinstate him to the post of gangman and consequently, to absorb his services as Probationary Mazdoor effective from the date of completion of six years of initial service and to grant all the consequential benefits including the arrears of salary, seniority and promotion etc.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as gangman by the KPTCL for the vacant post of Assistant Lineman but he was designated as gangman and worked all along in S-4 Sub-Division, till 2013. On 03.06.2004, settlement was entered into between the respondent – KPTCL along with the Employees Union resolving to absorb about 7528 Gangmen as Probationary Mazdoors. On 27.07.2007, when the petitioner’s name was not absorbed in terms of the settlement, he made representation requesting the concerned respondent to absorb his service on par with others as per Annexure ‘J’. The Assistant Executive Engineer under whom the petitioner was working had also written a letter to respondent No.3 to include the name of the petitioner in the eligibility list as per Annexure ‘C’ dated 02.09.2008 at serial No.115. Again on 07.08.2009, respondent No.3 submitted the entire details of the petitioner to the Superintending Engineer to take necessary steps for absorption of the services of the petitioner. One more letter dated 30.03.2010 was written by Assistant General Manager to respondent No.3 in this regard. Again, respondent No.3 had also written a letter dated 16.04.2010 to respondent No.2 informing that petitioner name is found at serial No.115 in the eligibility list and requested to take necessary action for absorption.
3. It is further case of the petitioner that since he was suffering from jaundice, he could not report to the duty as he was under treatment. On 16.02.2013, a call notice was issued by respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to report for duty immediately. Accordingly, the petitioner on 20.02.2013, reported to duty and continued to work as gangman. On 12.04.2013, respondent No.2 wrote a letter to respondent No.3 seeking details of the petitioner so as to take necessary steps for absorption of his services. As other temporary gangman by name R. Gurumurthy, who was also working with the petitioner was absorbed as Probationary Mazdoor from 01.04.2007 and paid all the monetary and service benefits. Abruptly, the petitioner was refused with employment by the respondents and not permitted to discharge the work, even after submitting number of representation as well as recommendations made from respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 regarding absorption. Hence, this writ petition is filed.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties to the lis.
5. Sri K. Srinivasa, learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition contended that the petitioner worked for more than 12 years as a gangman and he is entitled for absorption calculating his services from the date of completion of 6 years of initial service and as per the settlement entered into between the parties the petitioner ought to have absorbed as Probationary Mazdoors. He further contended that similarly situated gangmen are absorbed and when the petitioner’s name was excluded and a representation was made in this regard, the respondent No.3 has recommended to include the name of the petitioner in the eligibility list, respondent No.2 has not considered nor passed any appropriate order till today. Therefore, he sought for a writ of mandamus.
6. Per contra, Smt. C.B.Poornima, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 on instructions submits that representation of the petitioner as per Annexure ‘J’ filed before respondent No.3 dated 20.02.2013 will be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law within a period of three months, if not already considered and disposed of. The said submission is placed on record.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties and perused entire available material on record carefully.
8. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both parties, it is undisputed fact that the petitioner was working in respondents - BESCOM for more than 12 years as gangman till he was refused with employment by the respondents till 30.06.2013. It is also not in dispute that as per Annexure ‘C’, respondent No.3 has made recommendation to respondent No.2 to include the name of the petitioner as he was working as gangman for absorption on 02.09.2008. The name of the petitioner in the list is found at serial No.115. Though the petitioner had reported to duty on 20.02.2013, after taking treatment for jaundice, he has continued his employment as gangman. It is vehemently contended that another temporary gangman by name R. Gurumurthy, who was also working along with the petitioner was absorbed on 26.04.2013, as Probationary Mazdoor from 01.04.2007 and has been paid with all the monetary and service benefits. The representation of the petitioner is neither considered till today nor appropriate order is passed. Therefore, the petitioner is made out a case to issue writ of mandamus as prayed for.
9. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the present writ petition is allowed. Writ of Mandamus is issued to respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.02.2013 vide Annexure ‘J’ and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not already considered and disposed of.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE nvj