SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 588

State of Karnataka – Appellant
Versus
C. K. PATTAMASHETTY – Respondent


( 1 ) THESE two appeals involving common questions of law and facts were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common order.

( 2 ) THE basic fact of this matter is not in dispute.

( 3 ) RESPONDENT 1 herein was appointed as an Assistant Librarian in bangalore University. He was promoted as Deputy Librarian in May 1980. He was appointed as a Librarian in the University against a vacant post on 2-3-1994.

( 4 ) THE respondent filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court, inter alia, for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the university to treat him as a Lecturer contending, inter alia, that he had been appointed as an Honorary Visiting Professor to participate in the teaching work of the Department of Library Science without any financial commitment by an office order dated 20-9-1986 and as such he would be deemed to be a "teacher of the University" within the meaning of the provisions of Section 2 (8) of the Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 (for short "the Act" ). It was further contended that in terms of the said appointment as Honorary Visiting Professor he has been participating in the teaching work.

( 5 ) THE lear














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top