SMT HASEENA BANU C Z vs GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 18878 OF 2021 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT HASEENA BANU C. Z.,
W/O SYED MUJEEBULLA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
OCC. TYPIST,
OFFICE OF CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS,
SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE, VIDYANAGAR,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577203.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. ANUPAMA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by AASEEFA
PARVEEN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS,
ENVIRONMENT AND ECOLOGY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
M.S.BUILDING,
BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF
CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
ARANYA BHAVAN, 18TH CROSS,
MALLESWARAM,
BANGALORE-560003.
3. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (IN-
CHARGE)

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE VIDYANAGAR,
SHIVAMOGGA,
KARNATAKA - 577203.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.C. DESHMUKH, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
30/08/2021 PASSED BY THE HON BLE KARNATAKA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO. 871/2019 (
AT ANNEXURE - A) AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
23/01/2019 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ( AT
ANNEXURE - A36), ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE
OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
30/08/2021 PASSED BY THE HON BLE KARNATAKA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO. 871/2019 (
AT ANNEXURE - A) IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO THE
REJECTION OF CONTINUANCE OF THE SERVICES OF THE
PETITIONER AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23/01/2019
PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ( AT ANNEXURE - A36),
CONSEQUENTLY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
and
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
Aggrieved by the order passed by the Karnataka
State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru in Application
No.871/2019 dated 30.08.2021, the applicant therein filed
this writ petition seeking for setting aside the impugned
order.
2. Heard Smt.Anupama Hegde, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Sri.S.C.Deshmukh, AGA, who
represented the respondents.
3. The case of the petitioner in nutshell as borne
by record is that Government of Karnataka undertook the
project of Western Ghats Forestry and for that purpose
248 posts were created, out of which, 21 posts were
earmarked for Data Entry Operators. Petitioner was one
among the appointees to the post of Data Entry Operator.
She was appointed through order dated 24.02.1997. The
appointment was only till 31.03.1998. However, the

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
project continued beyond 01.04.1998, and thus the
services of the petitioner continued from time to time.
Subsequently, a direction was issued by respondent No.1
through letter dated 06.01.2003 to abolish the post of
Data Entry Operator. On that, petitioner approached
Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal by filing
Application No.888/2003 seeking to quash the letter dated
06.01.2003 and also the letter dated 21.01.2003. The
Tribunal by order dated 14.09.2015 directed respondents
to consider continuation of service of the petitioner as
Data Entry Operator subject to availability of such post.
After several communications, second respondent passed
an order on 30.12.2017 to continue the services of the
petitioner in the cadre of Typist. However, the Forum for
Eradication of Corrupt Civil Servants (R) and others gave a
complaint against the petitioner. On that the matter was
inquired into and finally third respondent issued notice to
the petitioner to submit her reply as to why her
appointment should not be withdrawn. Finally, on

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
23.01.2019 orders were passed withdrawing the earlier
orders dated 30.12.2017 and 27.02.2018.
4. Making her submission on the merits of the
matter, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that
the petitioner was appointed as Data Entry Operator on
merit basis. She continued her service without any
blemish. As per the orders of the Administrative Tribunal
in Application No.888/2003, respondents considered the
request of the petitioner to continue her service and
appointed her as Typist. However, subsequently her
appointment was unilaterally withdrawn, which is
impermissible under law. Learned counsel also states that
without observing the genuineness in the case of the
petitioner, the application filed i.e. Application
No.871/2019 was dismissed by the Tribunal and therefore
setting aside the order of the Tribunal, a direction may be
issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as
Typist.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
5. Opposing the submission thus made, learned
AGA submitted that the appointment of the petitioner as
Data Entry Operator was temporary. She was appointed
for attending the work during implementation of the
Western Ghats Forestry Project and on completion of the
purpose, her services were terminated. Petitioner without
any basis filed Application No.888/2003 before the
Tribunal. Tribunal directed the respondents to continue the
service of the petitioner subject to availability of any post.
However, respondents took that order as a mandate and
gave appointment. Indeed such appointment is against the
judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in respect
of giving appointments to individuals in sanctioned posts
without following the Rules and Regulations. After a
complaint was received regarding appointment of the
petitioner, respondents enquired into the issue and
realizing that the services of petitioner cannot be
continued, gave notice to her and after going through the
explanation given by her, her services were terminated

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
and thus Tribunal rightly dismissed the application filed by
the petitioner.
6. It is pertinent to note that the appointment of
the petitioner as Data Entry Operator was purely
temporary and agreeing with such temporary appointment
she joined into service. On accomplishment of the purpose
for which she was appointed, steps were taken to
discontinue her. However, she approached the Tribunal
and got an order. Even the order passed in her favour i.e.
orders in Application No.888/2003 only directed
respondents to look into the issue of continuity of her
service subject to availability of any post. Considering
these aspects, Tribunal at para 19 of the impugned order
observed as under:
"After the directions of the Tribunal which
reads, 'considering the same the respondents
are directed to consider the continuance of the
services of the applicants as Data Entry
Operator subject to availability of any post to
accommodate the applicant', the Government
clearly directed the PCCF to give an

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
endorsement to the applicant that she cannot
be considered as a DEO for want of the
sanctioned post in the Department. However,
hanging on to the observations of the Tribunal
much time has been spent on the issue of
appointment of the applicant. The order issued
on 30.12.2017 states that the applicant is
continued against a permanent post of typist
in the pay scale of 11600/- 21000/- with basic
pay of Rs.11,600/- with effect from
1.11.2017. The order is worded contrary to
the usual practice of 'appointed against the
sanctioned post of ....'. The ambiguity in this
order clearly shows that there was no
appropriate and absolute direction to appoint
the applicant."
7. Petitioner failed to establish that she is entitled
for regular appointment. Petitioner cannot seek
appointment to a sanctioned post of typist on the ground
that she served as Data Entry Operator on temporary
basis for considerable period. Therefore, we find no
grounds to interfere with the observations made and the
ultimate decision taken by the Tribunal. Thus, the writ
petition is devoid of merits.

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60601-DB
WP No. 18878 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010379602021
8. Resultantly, following
ORDER
Writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
AP
CT:TSM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17