Back
1993 Supreme(Kar) 278
Karnataka High Court
B.SHIVALINGAIAH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA - Respondent
Decided On : 11-08-93
W.P. : 32769 of 1993
B.B.BAJENTRI, B.V.ACHARYA RAO, V.R.DATAR
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the member secretary of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board to possess specific qualifications as per the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the court's limitation in issuing a writ to continue a contractual appointment.
Headnote:
APPOINTMENT - Member Secretary of Karnataka State Pollution Control Board - Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Section 4 - The court discussed the validity of the appointment of Sri Sudhakar as member secretary of the board and the curtailment of Dr. Shivalingaiah's appointment. It highlighted the qualifications required for the member secretary and the legality of the appointments under the Act.
Fact of the Case:
Dr. B. Shivalingaiah challenged the curtailment of his appointment as member secretary of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board and the appointment of Sri K. Sudhakar in his place. Sri A. V. Amarnathan, an advocate, filed a public interest litigation seeking a declaration that the appointment of Sri K. Sudhakar as member secretary was illegal and to continue Dr. Shivalingaiah as member secretary. The court considered the qualifications required for the member secretary and the legality of the appointments under the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointment of Sri Sudhakar as member secretary was not proper as he did not possess the required qualifications under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. It also held that Dr. Shivalingaiah's appointment was contractual, and therefore, the court could not issue a writ to continue his appointment. The court rejected the writ petitions filed by Dr. Shivalingaiah and Sri Amarnathan.
Issues: 1. Validity of the appointment of Sri Sudhakar as member secretary. 2. Legality of the curtailment of Dr. Shivalingaiah's appointment. 3. Maintainability of the writ petition filed by Sri Amarnathan.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointment of Sri Sudhakar as member secretary was not proper due to his lack of required qualifications. It also determined that Dr. Shivalingaiah's appointment was contractual, and therefore, the court could not issue a writ to continue his appointment. The court found that Sri Amarnathan's writ petition was maintainable as the appointment of Sri Sudhakar was prima facie contrary to the Act.
Final Decision: The court rejected both the writ petitions and recorded the submission that Dr. Shivalingaiah would be allowed to continue as a member secretary until a suitable person is appointed, and a month's salary in addition to the salary for the period for which he worked will be paid. The court also rejected Sri Amarnathan's writ petition with the same observations.
( 1 ) BOTH these petitions are listed for preliminary hearing. By consent of both parties both the petitions are disposed of.
( 2 ) THE reliefs sought and the questions to be decided in both these petitions are common. Hence, they are clubbed together and a common order is passed.
( 3 ) W. P. No. 32769 of 1993 is the one filed by Dr. B. shivalingaiah challenging curtailing his appointment as member secretary of the Karnataka state pollution control board (hereinafter called as 'the board') and in his place appointing one Sri k. Sudhakar, a junior grade k. a. s. officer.
( 4 ) W. P. No. 33051 of 1993 is filed by one Sri a. v. amarnathan, an advocate of this bar as a public interest litigation seeking for a declaration that the appointment of Sri k. Sudhakar as member secretary of the board as illegal and to continue Dr. Shivalingaiah as a member secretary.
( 5 ) A few facts which are necessary to dispose of these two writ petitions are: the Karnataka state pollution control board is a board constituted under the provisions of the pollution board Act, viz. The water (prevention and control of pollution) Act, 1974, hereinafter called as 'the act'. Here we are concerned with section 4 of the act which deals with conferring powers on the state government to constitute a state pollution control board which is a corporate body. Sub-section (2) of section 4 deals with composition of the board which consists of a chairman, representatives of both the state and the local authorities and non-official members. These appointments shall be made by the state. The board also consists of a full time member secretary who must have knowledge and experience of scientific, engineer or management aspects to deal with pollution control. The said section is extracted hereunder:" (2) a state board shall consist of the following members namely: (a) chairman, being a person having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of (matter relating to environmental protection) or a person having knowledge and experience in administering institutions dealing with the matters aforesaid, to be nominated by the state government: provided that the chairman may be either whole-time or part-time as the state government may think fit; (b) (such number of officials not exceeding five) to be nominated by the state government to represent that government; (c) (such number of persons, not exceeding five), to be nominated by the state government from amongst the members of the local authorities functioning within the state; (d) (such number of non-officials, not exceeding three), to be nominated by the state government to represent the interests of agriculture, fishery or industry or trade or any other interest which in the opinion of the state government, ought to be represented; (e) two persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by the state government, to be nominated by that government; (f) a full-time member-secretary possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience of scientific, engineering or management aspects of pollution control, to be appointed by the state government. " (emphasis supplied) the petitioner was earlier working as a professor in the department of environmental engineering - post graduate centre, p. e. s. college of engineering, mandya. He is the holder of the degrees of b. e. , m. e. in environmental engineering, ph. d. in environmental engineering and specialised in water quality modelling. On 18-2-1991 as per annexure b, government appointed the petitioner as member secretary of the board for a period of one year on the terms and conditions enclosed to the notification. As per the terms and conditions of the appointment, the period of appointment mentioned was for a period of one year extendable year after year. The commencement and end of contract is for one year and the contract service will commence from the date of his relieving from the charge of the post in the p. e.
