Ashok B. Hinchigeri, J.

1. The petitioner has challenged the notification, dated 30-9-2015 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent 1 appointing the respondent 3 as the Director of Mysuru Palace Board. Sri M.S. Bhagwat, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Government Order, dated 9-5-2014 (Annexure-E) prescribes the eligibility for the appointment of the Director of Mysuru Palace Board; he has to be from K.A.S., Group A, Senior Scale or K.A.S., Group A, Selection Grade. He submits that the respondent 3 is admittedly not a K.A.S. Officer at all. Prior to her appointment as the Director of Mysuru Palace Board, she was working as Joint Controller of State Accounts Department.

2. He submits that on the ground that the respondent 3 draws the salary higher than that of K.A.S. Officer, she cannot be treated as K.A.S. Officer. In support of his submissions, he relies on the Division Bench's order, dated 11-1-2016 (Annexure-L) passed in W.P. No. 53867 of 2015.

3. He submits that as the respondent 3 is not entitled to hold the Public Office of Director of Mysuru Palace Board, she is to be ousted therefrom by issuing the writ of quo warranto. He has relied on the following