Kamble Satish Kumar vs. Dr. N. V. Prasad

COURT NO.4

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal Nos.6371-6384/2022

S G JAMALUDHEEN ETC ETC

Appellant( $s$ )

VERSUS

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS ETC ETC & ORS.

Respondent $(s)$

IN FIRST FIVE CASES 1

(IA No. 183356/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 63513/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 63512/2023 -APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 141222/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 12566/2021 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 58/2016 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 26327/2024 -PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 44/2016 - RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER)

WITH

C.A. No. 6385-6409/2022 (IV-A) (IA No. 176708/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 102322/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION)

$SLP(C)$ No. 32427-32452/2014 (IV-A)

C.A. No. 6410-6488/2022 (IV-A) (IA No. 122084/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 42638/2018 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION, IA No. 159/2016 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 64891/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 26819/2021 - RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER)

SLP(C) No. 2645-2674/2015 (IV-A) (IA No. 105305/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 33107/2019 - STAY APPLICATION)

SLP(C) No. 34490-34493/2014 (IV-A)

SLP(C) No. 4713-4976/2015 (IV-A) IA No. 265/2015 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

SLP(C) No. 1478-1479/2015 (IV-A)

SLP(C) No. 30334/2016 (IV-A)

Signa Te Not VNO. 196699/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION

15:17 SPL.P.(C)...CC No. 2570-2571/2017 (IV-A)

⁽IA No. 1/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 3/2017 -CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS)

SLP(C) No. 3911-3949/2017 (IV-A) (IA No. 42023/2019 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES, IA No. 17833/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 1/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 130096/2018 - DISPENSING WITH SERVICE OF NOTICE, IA No. 130106/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 42028/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM PAYING COURT FEE) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 2821-2859/2017 (IV-A) IA No. 1/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 2880-2918/2017 (IV-A) IA No. 1/2017 - PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) Diary No(s). 18428/2024 (IV-A) Diary No(s). 18802/2024 (IV-A) IA No. 106168/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 27-02-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN For Appellant(s) : Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. S. Nandakumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Deepika Nandakumar, Adv. Mr. Viresh Kumar Bhawra, Adv. Ms. Sandhya Dutt, Adv. Mr. Aakash Elango, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, AOR Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv. Ms. K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, AOR Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Vishak Hegde, Adv. Mr. Sufyan Hasan, Adv. Ms. Hema Malik, Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ankolekar Gurudatta, AOR Mr. Korada Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr. Venu Gopal Meesala, Adv. Mr. Bhadresh Harikant, Adv. Mrs. Jayasheela Y J, Adv. Mr. Gautam Narayan, Sr. Adv.

Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Ms. Asmita Singh, Adv. Ms. Chitransha Singh Shikarwar, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Bharti, Adv. Ms. Vagisha Kochar, AOR Mr. Tushar Nair, Adv. Mr. Anand Sanjay M Nuli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Suraj Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Nanda Kumar K B, Adv. Mrs. Samina S, Adv. Mr. Nahar Singh Yadav, Adv. M/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR Mr. Anup Jain, AOR Mr. Brijesh Kalappa, Adv. Ms. Divya Nair, Adv. Mr. Abdul Azeem Kalebudde, AOR Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Sr. Adv. Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, AOR Mr. Rahul Jain, Adv. Mr. Kumar Parimal, Adv. Mr. Smarhar Singh, AOR Mr. Pankaj Prakash, Adv. Mr. Archit Upadhayay, AOR Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ankolekar Gurudatta, AOR Mr. R. V. Kameshwaran, AOR Mr. H. Chandra Sekhar, AOR Mr. Harish Pandey, AOR Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Ms. Mythili S, Adv. Mr. Shekhar G Devasa, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Pawan Shyam, Adv. Ms. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv.

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. Mr. Vishwanath Chaturvedi, Adv. M/S. Devasa & Co., AOR Mr. Lakshmi Raman Singh, AOR Mr. Shoeb Alam, Sr. Adv. Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, AOR Mr. Ravi Chandra Prakash, Adv. Ms. Vani Vyas, Adv. Mr. Dev Sareen, Adv. Mr. Prakhar Singh, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar Gupta, AOR Ms. Vagisha Kochar, AOR M/S. Dharmaprabhas Law Associates, AOR Mr. Chandrashekhar A. Chakalabbi, Adv. Mr. S.k Pandey, Adv. Mr. Awanish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anshul Rai, Adv. Mr. Sudhanshu Prakash, AOR Mr. Shekhar G Devasa, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Pawan Shyam, Adv. Ms. Thashmitha Muthanna, Adv. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Nagar, Adv. Mr. Vishwanath Chaturvedi, Adv. M/S. Devasa & Co., AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

A notification was published on 18th August, 2006 by the Karnataka Public Service Commission (for short, 'the KPSC') inviting applications for the post of Motor Vehicle Inspectors (total 145 posts). The qualifications for the post were laid down in the said advertisement. There were several applications filed before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal for challenging the

4

notification dated 18th August, 2006.

By the impugned judgment dated 25th May, 2010 passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, number of applications filed for challenging the advertisement dated 18th August, 2006 were disposed of. From the cause title of the judgment dated 25th May, 2010, it appears that total applicants in the original applications were 12. By the said order, the Administrative Tribunal quashed the notification dated 18th August, 2006, as it was at variance with Condition No.3 of the qualifications described by the Central Government by Notification dated 19th June, 1989. The Administrative Tribunal quashed the notification dated 18th August, 2006 as the same was not in conformity with the condition no.3 laid down in notification dated 19th June, 1989 issued by the Central Government in exercise of powers under sub-section 4 of Section 213 of the Motors Vehicle Act, 1988. Condition NO.3 was of candidates having working experience of at least one year in a reputed automobile workshop which undertakes repairs of light motor vehicles, heavy goods vehicles and heavy passenger motor vehicles fitted with petrol and diesel engine.

Writ petitions were filed before the Karnataka High Court for impugning the judgment of the Administrative Tribunal. By the impugned judgment in Writ Petition Nos.6842-6880 of 2010 (S-KAT) and connected matters, the Division Bench passed the following order:

"30. In view of confirmation of the order dated 25.05.2010 of the Administrative Tribunal and dismissal of the writ petitions referred to at para 1 above, the order dated 02.03.2010 of the Administrative Tribunal passed in the applications

5

referred to at para 29 above directing issuance of appointment orders is liable to be set aside and it is accordingly set aside. The writ petitions referred to para 29 above, except Writ Petition Nos.10106/2010 and 12726-12763/2010, are accordingly disposed of. The writ petitions filed by the State in W.P. Nos.10106/2010 and 12726-12763/2010 are disposed of as withdrawn as sought in the memo dated 17.07.2014. In view of final disposal of all the writ petitions in terms stated above, no order is necessary on the pending interlocutory applications; and they stand disposed of accordingly."

Civil Appeal Nos.006371-006384 of 2022 along with other appeals were heard by this Court from time to time. On 4th December, 2014, this Court passed an order directing that appointees who were inducted into service in the year 2008, and who were continuing on that day shall not be disturbed. An application was made by the said employees which was disposed on 11th July, 2016 directing the State Government to consider the cases of the applicants in terms of Rule 11 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Probation) Rules, 1977. There is no dispute that the probation of the employees who were the beneficiaries of first interim order dated 4th December, 2014 has been confirmed. Then comes order of this Court dated 30th August, 2022 which reads thus:

"We have heard learned counsel for parties and record the submissions of learned counsel for the State as under:-

(i) There are 105 persons who have been working during the interregnum period of time and in view of our observations in the Order dated 29.7.2022, learned counsel for the State submits he has obtained instructions from the Secretary Transport who is present in Court that these people will be absorbed from the original date.

(ii) There are 39 persons who initially cleared the medical test but on some complaints being made, the medical board was held again and they did not succeed before the medical board. It is the say of learned counsel for those applicants that this was so as a height requirement was taken into consideration which formed a part of the advertisement but not part of the Central Rules. On hearing learned counsel for parties, we feel that the appropriate course of action would be to hold a fresh Medical Board for all parameters excluding the requirement of height and dependent on that Medical Board would arise their question of absorption from the prospective date.

(iii) There are 11 persons more over whom the learned counsel for the State has serious objections and would like to withdraw the affidavit filed earlier on 24.8.2022 as it contains some mistakes and that he will file fresh affidavit within two weeks.

The aforesaid actions taken qua the first two categories would of course be subject to the final outcome of the petitions.

Any response to the affidavit filed by the State can be so filed within two weeks thereafter.

Leave granted.

Listing as per priority of the original date of filing of the SLP."

This order refers to earlier order of this Court dated 29th July, 2022. Under the order dated 29th July, 2022, a direction was issued by this Court which records as under:

"In order to amicably resolve the dispute, it has been suggested that the appellants having worked for 14 years and recruited in pursuance to a notification of 2006, if they are sought to be removed and denied their benefits, it may result in great injustice. On the other hand, learned counsel for the private respondents state that they have been agitating and on succeeding in two forums all they are wanting is their recruitment. There are stated to be 11 such candidates.

In our view, it is in the fitness of the case that the State Government finds an amicable resolution to this dispute which is in a sense their own creation.

Learned counsel for the State to obtain instructions as 2 to how and in what manner the

private respondents can be adjusted or absorbed, failing which, the concerned Secretary should be personally present in the Court. List IA No.141222/2021, IA No.12566/2021 & IA No. 102322/2022, for directions on 30th August, 2022. "

In terms of order dated 30th August, 2022, an affidavit has been filed by the State of Karnataka. The affidavit records that out of 39 candidates referred to in clause (ii) of order dated 30th August, 2022, 34 candidates attended the medical tests. 34 candidates were approved out of which one had reached age of superannuation. Therefore, 33 candidates were given appointments subject to the final outcome of the pending SLPs.

There were number of applications filed before the Administrative Tribunal challenging the process conducted on the basis of notification dated 18th August, 2016. We direct the KSPC to examine the cases of all the applicants who challenged the recruitment process on the basis of the notification dated 18th August, 2006. By sending notices to the said applicants, firstly the KSPC will ascertain whether any of them are interested in securing employment. In case of those who state that they are interested in securing employment, the KSPC will examine whether all of them were possessing qualification mentioned in clause 3 of Notification dated 19th June, 1989 as well as qualification in clause 2 (of possessing driving licences) in Notification dated 18th August, 2006. The KSPC shall inform the Court by filing an affidavit that how many of them possess both qualifications.

We grant time upto 31st March, 2025 to the KSPC to complete the exercise. The compliance affidavit shall be filed on or before 7th

8

April, 2025. We will consider the compliance affidavit on 24th April, 2025, when these appeals shall be listed as part-heard matters.

(KAVITA PAHUJA) (AVGV RAMU) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)