IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.30496/2019 (S-RES) BETWEEN 1. THIMMEGOWDA S/O LATE MUNINARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT WADDARA HALLI KADABAGERE POST-562 130 DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
2. CHETAN T S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT WADDARA HALLI KADABAGERE POST-562 130 DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT (BY SRI M C BASAVARAJU, ADV.) AND 1. THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS S KARIYAPPA ROAD, BANASHANKARI BANGALORE-560 070 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH BANGALORE NORTH TALUK YALAHANKA BANGALORE-560 064 4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KADABAGERE GRAM PANCHAYATH DASANAPURA HOBLI-562 130 BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T.S.MAHANTHESH, AGA FOR R1, R2 TO R4 – NOTICE NOT ORDERED.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 TO ENGAGE THE SECOND PETITIONER AS A WATER MEN ON TEMPORARY BASIS IN PLACE OF THE FIRST PETITIONER IN THE OFFICE OF THE R-4 BY PLACING THE REPRESENTATION DTD.18.12.2018 MADE BY THE 2ND PETITIONER AS PER ANNX-E IN THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE OFFICE OF THE R-4 FOR ITS CONSIDERATION UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate.
2. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent. Notice to respondent Nos.2 to 4 is not ordered in the light of the order to follow:-
3. The petitioners are father and son. It is the claims of the first petitioner that the first petitioner was employed as a waterman with the 4th respondent-Panchayat and that he has attained superannuation and on account of superannuation they have submitted a representation to the 4th respondent praying that the second petitioner the son of the first petitioner be appointed in the said post. The post of waterman is not a hereditary post. It is not the case of the petitioner that the application is one seeking appointment on compassionate basis or that the application is made pursuant to any notification inviting applications. In that view of the matter, the petitioners having no vested right to seek for an order of appointment much less a writ in the nature of mandamus directing employment, in the considered opinion of this court the instant writ petition is wholly misconceived and devoid of merits.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
Chs* CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE