- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 15791 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR M S/O MAHADEVI P B AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O B-428, JUDICIAL STAFF QUARTERS, NGEF LAYOUT, NEW BAIYAPPANAHALLI BENGALURU 560038 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MONISH C P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL Digitally HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,signed by KIRAN KUMAR OPPOSITE TO VIDHANA SOUDHA, R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001 Location: HIGH COURT OF 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (DPAR) GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAW JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU 560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NITIN RAMESH., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SMT. KAVITHA H C , ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VK NOT FILED) SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R2 & R3)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING AND SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED REPLY NO-DJA 550/1993

LETTER DATED 22.01.2026 (ANNEXURE-F) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, AS BEING ARBITRARY, NON-SPEAKING, AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RECONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 17.09.2025 (ANNEXURE-E) AFRESH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AND TO PASS A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER THEREON WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. C) DIRECT THAT WHILE RECONSIDERING THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION, RESPONDENT NO.1 SHALL SPECIFICALLY EXAMINE THE ISSUES RELATING TO DIFFERENTIAL WORKING HOURS, LUNCH INTERVAL, SATURDAY AND HOLIDAY STRUCTURE, AND THE PROPORTIONALITY OF THE CUMULATIVE SERVICE BURDEN IN LIGHT OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. D) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

“ (a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned reply No.DJA 550/1993 letter dated 22.01.2026 (Annexure-F) issued by respondent No.1, as being arbitrary, non-speaking, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondent No.1 to reconsider the petitioner's representation dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure-E) afresh, in accordance with law, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (c) direct that while reconsidering the petitioner's representation, respondent No.1 shall specifically examine the issues relating to differential working hours, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 lunch interval, Saturday and holiday structure, and the proportionality of the cumulative service burden in light of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. d) pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner joined the service as a Second Division Assistant. The State Government issued a Notification dated 12.06.2019 declaring every 4th Saturday as a general holiday for the State Department. The State Government issued a Corrigendum dated 12.12.2019 modifying the applicability of 4th Saturday as a general holiday in relation to the judiciary and its staff. The High Court has issued a Notification dated 30.12.2019 prescribing the working hours of the District Judiciary - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 from 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. and designating the 4th Saturday as a non-sitting half working day. The petitioner submitted a representation seeking reconsideration and rationalization of the existing working hours and holiday structure applicable to the Ministerial staff of the District Judiciary. Respondent No.1 issued a reply rejecting the representation solely by referring to the notification dated 30.12.2019. Hence, this writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the respondent No.1 issued the impugned endorsement dated 22.01.2026 vide Annexure ‘F’ and the same is in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, on this ground, he prays to allow the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026

CNR: KAHC010317652026 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the High Court has issued a notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D’ wherein the working hours of all the District and Taluk Courts in the State of Karnataka is modified. According to which, there is a corresponding change in the office hours of the staff working in those Courts. Hence, issued the said Notification. However, the petitioner has not challenged the notification dated 30.12.2019. As such, respondent No.1 has rightly issued the impugned endorsement vide Annexure ‘F’. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for parties. 8. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner joined the service as Second Division Assistant in respondent No.1 in the District Judiciary. On 12.06.2019, the State Government issued a notification declaring - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 every fourth Saturday as a general holiday for the State Government departments. The State Government issued a corrigendum on 12.12.2019, modifying the applicability of fourth Saturday as general holiday in relation to the judiciary and its staff. According to the said notification, this Court has issued a notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D.

9. From the perusal of the said notification, it is clear that in view of the Full Court Resolution dated 18.12.2019, read with Government Corrigendum No.DPAR 39 HHL 2019 dated 12.12.2019, it was notified that the working hours of all the District and Taluka courts in the State of Karnataka is modified, i.e., working hours from 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m. (first session), 02.00 p.m. to 02.45 p.m. (lunch break), 02.45 to 05.45, (second session). There is a corresponding change in the office hours for the staff in the said courts. It is also clarified that the office - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 hours extended till 06.00 p.m. with a lunch break between 02.00 p.m. and 02.45. Further, the fourth Saturday of every month is a half working day, which is a non-sitting day for the said courts. The judicial officers were directed to utilise every fourth Saturday for the purpose of inspection of the courts and jail visits instead of third Saturday. 10. From the perusal of the said notification, it is clear that the said notification was issued based on the Full Court Resolution dated 18.12.2019. Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged the notification dated 30.12.2019 issued by respondent No.1. Unless the petitioner challenges the said notification, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed in the representation. Hence, respondent No.1 has rightly issued the impugned endorsement vide Annexure ‘F’. - 9 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 11. In this view of the matter, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is dismissed. (ii) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D’, if so desired. (iii) In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 15791 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR M S/O MAHADEVI P B AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O B-428, JUDICIAL STAFF QUARTERS, NGEF LAYOUT, NEW BAIYAPPANAHALLI BENGALURU 560038 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MONISH C P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL Digitally HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,signed by KIRAN KUMAR OPPOSITE TO VIDHANA SOUDHA, R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001 Location: HIGH COURT OF 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (DPAR) GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAW JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU 560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NITIN RAMESH., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SMT. KAVITHA H C , ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VK NOT FILED) SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R2 & R3)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING AND SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED REPLY NO-DJA 550/1993

LETTER DATED 22.01.2026 (ANNEXURE-F) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, AS BEING ARBITRARY, NON-SPEAKING, AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RECONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 17.09.2025 (ANNEXURE-E) AFRESH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AND TO PASS A REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDER THEREON WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. C) DIRECT THAT WHILE RECONSIDERING THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION, RESPONDENT NO.1 SHALL SPECIFICALLY EXAMINE THE ISSUES RELATING TO DIFFERENTIAL WORKING HOURS, LUNCH INTERVAL, SATURDAY AND HOLIDAY STRUCTURE, AND THE PROPORTIONALITY OF THE CUMULATIVE SERVICE BURDEN IN LIGHT OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. D) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

“ (a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned reply No.DJA 550/1993 letter dated 22.01.2026 (Annexure-F) issued by respondent No.1, as being arbitrary, non-speaking, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondent No.1 to reconsider the petitioner's representation dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure-E) afresh, in accordance with law, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (c) direct that while reconsidering the petitioner's representation, respondent No.1 shall specifically examine the issues relating to differential working hours, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 lunch interval, Saturday and holiday structure, and the proportionality of the cumulative service burden in light of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. d) pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner joined the service as a Second Division Assistant. The State Government issued a Notification dated 12.06.2019 declaring every 4th Saturday as a general holiday for the State Department. The State Government issued a Corrigendum dated 12.12.2019 modifying the applicability of 4th Saturday as a general holiday in relation to the judiciary and its staff. The High Court has issued a Notification dated 30.12.2019 prescribing the working hours of the District Judiciary - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 from 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. and designating the 4th Saturday as a non-sitting half working day. The petitioner submitted a representation seeking reconsideration and rationalization of the existing working hours and holiday structure applicable to the Ministerial staff of the District Judiciary. Respondent No.1 issued a reply rejecting the representation solely by referring to the notification dated 30.12.2019. Hence, this writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the respondent No.1 issued the impugned endorsement dated 22.01.2026 vide Annexure ‘F’ and the same is in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, on this ground, he prays to allow the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026

CNR: KAHC010317652026 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the High Court has issued a notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D’ wherein the working hours of all the District and Taluk Courts in the State of Karnataka is modified. According to which, there is a corresponding change in the office hours of the staff working in those Courts. Hence, issued the said Notification. However, the petitioner has not challenged the notification dated 30.12.2019. As such, respondent No.1 has rightly issued the impugned endorsement vide Annexure ‘F’. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for parties. 8. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner joined the service as Second Division Assistant in respondent No.1 in the District Judiciary. On 12.06.2019, the State Government issued a notification declaring - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 every fourth Saturday as a general holiday for the State Government departments. The State Government issued a corrigendum on 12.12.2019, modifying the applicability of fourth Saturday as general holiday in relation to the judiciary and its staff. According to the said notification, this Court has issued a notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D.

9. From the perusal of the said notification, it is clear that in view of the Full Court Resolution dated 18.12.2019, read with Government Corrigendum No.DPAR 39 HHL 2019 dated 12.12.2019, it was notified that the working hours of all the District and Taluka courts in the State of Karnataka is modified, i.e., working hours from 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m. (first session), 02.00 p.m. to 02.45 p.m. (lunch break), 02.45 to 05.45, (second session). There is a corresponding change in the office hours for the staff in the said courts. It is also clarified that the office - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 hours extended till 06.00 p.m. with a lunch break between 02.00 p.m. and 02.45. Further, the fourth Saturday of every month is a half working day, which is a non-sitting day for the said courts. The judicial officers were directed to utilise every fourth Saturday for the purpose of inspection of the courts and jail visits instead of third Saturday. 10. From the perusal of the said notification, it is clear that the said notification was issued based on the Full Court Resolution dated 18.12.2019. Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged the notification dated 30.12.2019 issued by respondent No.1. Unless the petitioner challenges the said notification, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed in the representation. Hence, respondent No.1 has rightly issued the impugned endorsement vide Annexure ‘F’. - 9 -

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:38265 WP No. 15791 of 2026 CNR: KAHC010317652026 11. In this view of the matter, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is dismissed. (ii) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the notification dated 30.12.2019 vide Annexure ‘D’, if so desired. (iii) In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46