IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION NOs.43649-43651/2014 AND WRIT PETITION NOs.43652-43653/2014 AND WRIT PETITION NO.49928 /2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI PRASANNA KUMAR S S/O SRINIVASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O NO.A-3, BWSSB QUARTERS, 1ST CROSS, C.R. LAYOUT, 1ST PHASE, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU -560078.
2. SRI. KUSHAKUMAR K.S. S/O LATE G. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NO.153, 4TH MAIN, AGB, MUNESHWARA BLOCK, BENGALURU -560086.
3. RAMESH.C.
S/O CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ACCOUNT SUPERINTENDENT, OFFICE OF EE.SW, BWSSB, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU -560086.
4. SMT. MANGALA GOWRI W/O NARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, SENIOR MANAGER, OFFICE OF CHAIRMAN, BWSSB, 1ST FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU -560009.
5. SRI RAJANNA, S/O KAVALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, SENIOR MANAGER, OFFICE OF AC ACCOUNTS, BWSSB, 1ST FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU -560009.
6. SRI. M.R. SANTHOSH S/O RAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, MANAGER, OFFICE OF AEE N3, BWSSB, SAHAKARNAGARA, BENGALURU -560092. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS ADDL.CHIEF SECRETARY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT, VIKASASOUDHA, BENGALURU -560001.
2. THE BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWARGE BOARD, BY ITS CHAIRMAN, 1ST FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU -560009.
3. THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER/SECRETARY, THE BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY SEWARAGE BOARD, 1ST FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU -560009.
4. SMT. BHAGYA LAKSHMI W/O N.B. BAGERI, AGE MAJOR, ASSISTANT LAW OFFICER, 1ST FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SREEDHAR N HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B L SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. T.A.KARUMBAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 (NOC); R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DTD.1.8.2014, PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DTD.7.8.2014 DTD.1.8.2014 VIDE ANNEX-A ISSUED BY R-
2 PASSING THE REGULATION FOR ABSORPTION OF AN OFFICER WHO IS ON DEPUTATION AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In the instant petition, the petitioner has assailed the notification dated 01.08.2014 by which respondent No.4 absorbed in the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (for short ‘Board’) as Assistant Law Officer, while she was on deputation from Karnataka State Finance Corporation (for short ‘KSFC’).
2. On 03.02.2016, the detailed interim order was passed by this Court, which reads as under:
“The petitioners have challenged the legality of the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Notification dated 01.08.2014.
The learned counsel for petitioners submits that a bare perusal of the notification would clearly reveal that the Regulations’ 2014 has been passed only in order to benefit a Single individual, namely Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi, Manager (Legal) who has been on deputation with the Board for the last eight years despite all the protest and objections raised by the petitioners and other members of the Board.
According to the learned counsel for petitioners, the promulgation of Regulations’2014 is absolutely arbitrary and illegal. For, without amending the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Cadre, Recruitment and Promotion Regulation, 1981, the Regulations’2014 have been framed. The Regulations of 2014 are further said to have pre- eminence over C & R Regulations 1981, and over the BWSSB Act, 1964. According to the learned counsel, such a paramount effect cannot be given to the Regulations’ 2014. Therefore, the petitioners have a prima-facie strong case in their favour. Since the interest of petitioners is being adversely affected by the absorption of Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi, the balance of convenience is also on their side.
In case, the operation of the Notification were to be stayed, no irreparable loss would be caused to Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi as she has been sent on deputation. Whereas, irreparable loss would be caused to the petitioners as they cannot be posted to the post of Manager (Legal) in accordance with the C & R Regulations.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Board has merely submitted that even petitioner No.2 was absorbed. Therefore, absorption and promulgation of Regulations’ 2014 is justified.
The learned counsel for respondent No.4 has expressed his anxiety that in case, the operation of the impugned notification were to be stayed, it may jeopardize the position of respondent No.4 to continue in the said post.
A bare perusal of the Notification prima-facie reveals that Regulations’2014 have been promulgated merely in order to absorb Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi on the post of Manager (Legal). Curiously, according to the definition of Deputation of Manger (Legal) is said to mean ‘an officer appointed in the BWSSSB on deputation basis from the Karnataka State Finance Corporation’- the very Corporation from where Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi was deputed to the Board. Surprisingly, this regulation is paramount as Regulation No.3 clearly states, “notwithstanding anything contained in the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (Order and Recruitment) Regulations, 1981 or any other Rules or Regulation made or deemed to have made under the BWSSB Act, 1964, governing the method of recruitment or the employees of the Board”. Therefore, the petitioners certainly have a very strong case in their favour in challenging the impugned notification.
Even the balance of convenience lies in their favour as they happen to be regularly appointed employees of the Board whose chances of being appointed as Manager (Legal) is being affected by the Regulation’ 2014.
Since Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi was on deputation, no irreparable loss would be caused to her in case she is not absorbed. On the other hand, an irreparable loss would be caused to the petitioners as they would be denied of their right of consideration for the post of Manager (Legal) as no vacancy would exist with the absorption of Smt.L.Bhagyalakshmi.
Therefore, for the reasons stated above, this court stays the operation of the Notification bearing No.BWSSB:CAOS/311/06-2011-12/1600/2014-
15 dated 01.08.2014 (Annexure-‘A’) during the pendency of this petition.”
3. During the pendency of the present petition, service of respondent No.4 has been repatriated to KSFC. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 on instruction submitted that respondent No.4 is not interested in continuing even in KSFC due to the accident occurred, wherein, she has suffered certain major injuries. Arising out of these facts, respondent No.4 is stated to have submitted voluntary retirement to the Board. Undisputedly, Annexure-A, absorption notification dated 01.08.2014 is contrary to the Board Act and regularization. In the event of respondent No.4 absorbed, the petitioner’s right to promotion under the regulation would be affected.
4. Learned counsel for the Board on instruction submitted that service of respondent No.4 has been repatriated and that apart, petitioner has been promoted to the cadre of Manager.
5. In view of these developments, Annexure-A dated 01.08.2014 is set aside. Writ petition stands allowed. Respondent No.4 is permitted to make her grievance before the KSFC by making necessary application and in the event of respondent No.4 submitting any such representation or application for settlement of her dues, the same shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application of respondent No.4.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-.