The order, by which respondent No.3 was placed in

concurrent

charge

of

the

post

of

the

Registrar

(Administration), Kuvempu University, Shivamogga, is the

subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

It is the case of the petitioner that by order dated

26.07.2023, the petitioner was nominated to the post of

Registrar (Administration) and within a period of eight

- 3 -

days thereafter, he has been removed by virtue of

respondent No.3 being placed in concurrent charge and

this procedure adopted is wholly illegal.

The learned Additional Advocate General submits

that Section 17 of the Karnataka State Universities Act,

2000 (for short ‘the Act’), which was amended, required

that the Registrar was necessarily to be a whole-time

officer and should be an officer belonging to the All India

Service

or

an

officer

belonging

to

the

Karnataka

Administrative Service. It is submitted that since the

petitioner was neither an officer belonging to the All India

Service nor an officer belonging to the Karnataka

Administrative Service, he could not have been appointed

as the Registrar (Administration) and therefore, noticing

this illegality, the Government took a decision to place

respondent No.3 in concurrent charge of the said post and

therefore, there was no illegality in this order.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, however,

submits that it is a legal proposition that even if an order

- 4 -

is void, it has to be declared as void and was required to

be quashed by a competent Court and until then, it was

not permissible for any person to ignore the same.

5.

He placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Krishnadevi Malchand

Kamathia and others vs. Bombay Environmental

Action Group and others, (2011) 3 SCC 363.

6.

The reliance placed on this decision, in my view,

would be incorrect, since this proposition is in respect of

an order which has civil rights and whose validity is to be

adjudicated

by

a

competent

Court

of

law.

An

administrative order directing a person to be placed in

charge of a particular post cannot be equated with an

order

passed

by

an

authority

which

has

certain

consequential civil rights.

7.

If an employee is found to be ineligible to be posted

to a particular place, it will be open for the employer to

immediately withdraw the said order and pass an

- 5 -

appropriate order to ensure that a statutory provision is

adhered to.

8.

In the instant case, the statutory provision i.e.,

Section 17 of the Act requires that the post of Registrar is

to be held only by a whole-time officer who belongs to the

All India Service or an officer belonging to the Karnataka

Administrative Service. The respondents-State were

justified in posting respondent No.3 in concurrent charge

of the post of the Registrar (Administration), Kuvempu

University,

Shivamogga

and

thereby

displacing

the

petitioner.

9.

I find no infirmity in the order passed by the

respondent-State and the writ petition is therefore

dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

RK

CT: SN

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19