IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Smt. Rashmi M S – Petitioner
Versus
State of Karnataka Represented By The Principal Secretary To Education Department And Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.51487 of 2019 (S-RES)
Decided On : 17-04-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 16(4), 16(1), 226 and 16(4) - Receipt of a notice - Seeking to appoint a Lecturer - Seeking to bring selected candidate on record - Whether it is a vacancy in Government Department or a vacancy in a private institution aided by Government also the principles of reservation are made applicable, does not make any difference as long as concerned cadre consists of only one post - whether notification issued by the 4th respondent reserving a solitary post of Lecturer in Mathematics in favour of a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste would stand the scrutiny of law - Petitioner who was appointed by College a Lecturer in Mathematics continued to work as such - When College made an effort to issue a notification calling for applications from eligible candidates in all subjects including Mathematics - Petitioner and others approached Court in Writ Petition seeking to stall notification and consequently, mandamus to consider their cases for regularization –
Finding of the Court:
Apex Court in the afore-extracted judgment has clearly held rule of per incuriam can be applied a Court omits to consider a binding precedent of the same Court or superior Court rendered on the same issue - Fell for consideration before Co-ordinate Bench was whether there could be reservation to a solitary post - Issue being answered by Apex Court in plethora of judgments same having gone unnoticed in judgment of Coordinate Bench and Co-ordinate Bench relying on a judgment of the Apex Court – Court deem it appropriate to follow judgment of Apex Court which concerns the issue and not the judgment ignores binding precedent –
Result: Writ Petition is allowed
ORDER :
Petitioner in this writ petition calls in question the Notification dated 22nd September, 2019 issued by the 4th respondent/P.E.S. P.U.College (hereinafter referred to as ‘the College’ for short), an aided Educational Institution calling for applications from candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes (Women) in the subject Mathematics.
2. Sans unnecessary details, facts in brief for consideration of the issue in the lis are as follows:-
The petitioner who was appointed by the College on 05.09.2007 as a Lecturer in Mathematics continued to work as such. When the College made an effort to issue a notification calling for applications from eligible candidates in all the subjects including Mathematics, the petitioner and others approached this Court in Writ Petition No.21418-21422/2013 seeking to stall the notification and consequently, mandamus to consider their cases for regularization. This Court by an order dated 11.06.2013 granted an interim order of stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notification dated 8-02-2013 by its order dated 11-06-2013.
3. When the selection process was over, in terms of the notification issued, the College and others had approached this Court in Writ Petition No.22273/2016 and connected cases seeking a direction at the hands of this Court to the Government to pass appropriate orders on the list of selected candidates communicated to the Government. This writ petition came to be disposed of as having become infructuous on a memo filed by the College after receipt of a notice on 27-08-2018 by the Government directing filling up of vacancies in a particular manner of all the subjects in the College. This Court placing the memo on record disposed of the writ petition filed by the College and others by its order dated 11-09-2018. All this happened during the pendency of the writ petition filed by the petitioner along with four others stated supra.
4. After the disposal of the writ petition filed by the College and others as having become infructuous, the impugned notification is issued by the College seeking to appoint a Lecturer in the subject of Mathematics and reserving the post for a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste. This is the post in which the petitioner has been functioning right from 2007. This Court again by an interim order dated 4-12-2019 directing that no precipitate action be taken in the case of the petitioner, by a detailed order allowed an application seeking to bring the selected candidate on record in terms of the notification. It is this notification and the consequent action that are called in question by the petitioner in this writ petition.
5. Heard Sri V.Lakshminarayana, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. M.C. Nagashree, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2; Sri H.B.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Sri.L.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
6. The learned Senior Counsel would submit that the action of the 4th respondent/College in notifying one post in the subject of Mathematics and reserving the same for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and selecting the 5th respondent to the said post are all contrary to law, as it is a settled principle of law that a single post cannot be reserved in favour of candidates belonging to either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes as it would amount to 100% reservation.
7. On other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. M.C.Nagashree and Sri H.B.Chandrashekar, learned counsel representing the College in unison would contend that it is permissible to club all the vacancies together, notify a particular post and reserve the same in favour of candidates belonging to either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, which would not amount to 100% reservation as there are candidates in other subjects.
8. Both the learned counsels would place reliance upon a three Judge Bench decision of the Apex Court in the case of POST GRADUATE
Dr. Chakradhar Paswan v. State of Bihar & others
Government Of A.P. v. B.Satyanarayana Rao
Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh and Others v. K.L. Narasimhan and Another
Medical Education & Research v. Faculty Assn.
Post Graduate Institute Of Medical Education & Research v. Faculty Association
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research v. K.L. Narasimhan
State Of Karnataka v. K.Govindappa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.