JUDGMENT : MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J. 1. The question that arises for consideration is: "Whether continuous employment rendered by the respondent as daily wager/stipendiary graduate prior to his regularisation in services can be taken into consideration as qualified service to detriment the respondents' retirement benefits?" A similar question was raised before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in the case of Puttappa and Others. The Tribunal, placing reliance on Rule 247-A of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958, had held in favour of the employee. The said order was confirmed by the High Court. Ultimately, the matter reached the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 2238 of 2006, which came to be dismissed by an order dated 25-7-2003. 2. Thus, it is clear that the question involved in this writ petition is fully covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 2238 of 2006 disposed of on 25-7-2003 in the case of State of Karnataka and Others v. Puttappa (dead) by L.Rs. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held against the State in the aforementioned matter. Thus, this petition fails and the same is dismissed.