Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Alok Aradhe, S. Vishwajith Shetty, JJ.
S. Srinivasulu Naidu - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka & Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 1401 of 2021 (S-RES) in W.P. No. 9520 of 2020 (S-RES)
Decided On : 16-03-2022
Appointment - Dean cum Director - Rules and Regulations 2017, Regulation 16(1), Cadre and Recruitment Rules - The court discussed the appointment of the Dean cum Director in accordance with the Rules and Regulations 2017, Regulation 16(1), and Cadre and Recruitment Rules. The appointment made by the State Government was found to be not in accordance with the Regulations and Rules, and the court directed the State Government to conclude the process of selection and issue an order of appointment to the post of first Dean cum Director.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, who was appointed as an Assistant Professor at Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, challenged the appointment of Dr. Manoj Kumar as Dean cum Director of Bowring and Lady Curzon Medical College and Research Institute. The appellant sought consideration for the appointment to the post of Dean cum Director in accordance with the law.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointment made by the State Government for the post of Dean cum Director was not in accordance with the Regulations and Rules. The court directed the State Government to conclude the process of selection and issue an order of appointment to the post of first Dean cum Director.
Issues: The core issue was whether the appointment made by the State Government for the post of Dean cum Director was in accordance with the Regulations and Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The appointment of the first Dean cum Director has to be made under the Rules, and the State Government was directed to consider the case of the appellant for appointment to the post of first Dean cum Director in accordance with law.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeal and directed the State Government to conclude the process of selection and issue an order of appointment to the post of first Dean cum Director on or before 18.04.2022.
JUDGMENT
Alok Aradhe, J. - This intra court appeal arises from an order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the learned single Judge by which, the writ petition preferred by the appellant has been disposed of with a direction to the State Government to fill up the post of Dean cum Director of Bowring and Lady Curzon Medical College and Research Institute (hereinafter referred to as 'the Institute' for short). In order to appreciate the appellant's grievance, few facts need mention which are stated infra.
2. The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Professor on 23.08.2008 at Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute (hereinafter referred to as 'the BMCRI' for short). He was subsequently promoted as an Associate Professor on 17.12.2011 and thereafter as Professor on 05.02.2015. The State Government by an order dated 16.12.2016 resolved to set up the Institute in the premises of Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital. Even prior to the establishment of the Institute, one Dr. KS Manjunath was appointed as Special Officer vide order dated 16.05.2016, to supervise the establishment of the medical college.
3. The State Government by notification dated 20.05.2017, notified Institute Rules and Regulations, 2017 from 28.04.2017. However, prior to coming into force of the aforesaid Rules, Dr. KS Manjunath by a notification dated 04.04.2017 was appointed as Dean-cum-Director of the Institute. He attained the age of superannuation on 30.11.2017. The State Government issued another notification dated 30.11.2017 by which one Dr. K. Ravi, Professor and Head of the Department was placed in-charge as Dean-cum-Director of the Institute. However, by another notification issued on the same date, the notification appointing Dr. K. Ravi was modified and Dr. KS Manjunath was appointed as Dean-cum-Director for a period of one year on contract basis. Thereafter, by a notification dated 16.11.2018, Dr. KS Manjunath was appointed on contract basis on the post of Associate Professor in Othopeadic Department of the Institute for a period of 3 years or until further orders. He was also appointed as the Dean-cum-Director of the Institute for a period of 3 years or until further orders.
4. A Resolution was passed in the first meeting of the governing Council which was held on 12.02.2019 by which the Rules and Regulations and creation of several posts for the functioning of newly formed Institute were approved viz., Cadre and Recruitment Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short). After approval of the Rules on 10.07.2020, Dr. K.S. Manjunath proceeded on a leave of six weeks. Therefore, by a notification dated 03.08.2020 one Dr. Manoj Kumar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Respondent No. 7' for short) who was a Professor in BMCRI was given additional charge as Dean-cum-Director of the Institute.
5. The aforesaid notification was challenged by the appellant in a writ petition before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge by an order dated 17.11.2021, issued a direction to the State Government to notify the post of Dean cum Director and to invite applications from eligible candidates and thereafter, appoint the first Dean cum Director. In addition, the State Government has also directed to consider the candidature of the appellant for appointment to the post in question in accordance with law on or before 02.02.2022 or within two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed.
6. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of the scope of an intra court appeal. In Netai Bag vs. State of West BengaL (2000) 8 SCC 262, while dealing with the issue of new plea in an intra court appeal it has been held that the scope of an appeal cannot be greater than the original writ petition. The Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar vs. Narinder Verma (2006) 7 SCC 467 has held that no interference can be made in an intra court appeal on the basis of an argument not raised before the learned
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of the Dean cum Director must be made in accordance with the Regulations and Rules, and the State Government was directed to c....
Only the Head of Department shall be designated as Director-cum-Professor, confirming their integrated roles unless a distinct post is created.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the statutes' tenure for the post of Director applied, and the respondent No. 1 cannot cherry-pick advantageous factors from C & R Rules and s....
Temporary appointments in autonomous institutions do not confer permanent status or lien, maintaining the original cadre's substantive post as the employee's right.
Long-settled service positions via departmental recognition of appointments, seniority, and promotions over a decade cannot be disturbed on debatable cadre interpretations or disputed eligibility fac....
The court ruled that administrative decisions regarding college principal appointments may be reviewed for compliance with statutory regulations, particularly UGC Guidelines, emphasizing the importan....
The warning given to the petitioner had been condoned by his promotion to the post of Professor, and therefore, non-consideration of his case for appointment as interim Dean or regular Dean cannot su....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of seniority and fair consideration based on seniority in the appointment process, as interpreted under Statute 18 of the University....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
