Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 9124
- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7539
WP No. 202012 of 2021
C/W WP No. 201999 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 202012 OF 2021 (S-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 201999 OF 2021 (S-RES)
IN WP NO.202012 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
FAKEERAPPA S/O MATHYAREPPA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O TORANADINNI, TQ. MANVI,
DIST. RAICHUR-584120
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MAHESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE,
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001
2.
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONAL SOCIETY
(A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT)
AN ORGANIZATION OF SOCIAL WELFARE
DEPARTMENT, NO.8,
MSB-1, 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 052
Digitally
signed by B
NAGAVENI
Location:
High Court Of
Karnataka
- 2 -
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7539
WP No. 202012 of 2021
C/W WP No. 201999 of 2021
3.
THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC
SERVICE COMMISSION
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
UDYOG SOUDHA, PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001
4.
SUBBANNA S. S/O KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/AT GOLLA LINGAMMAHALLI,
VILLAGE AND POST SANDUR TALUKA
BELLARI DIST.-583112
5.
BABU S/O TUKARAM
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
AT POST DESAI KALLUR,
TQ. AFZALPUR,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585301
6.
JADEPPA H.
S/O SANNAFAKKERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
NO.15, GONAL VILLAGE,
SUGGENAHALLI POST,
BELLARY DIST, HOSPETE TALUKA
BELLARY-583 129
7.
SHIVARAJ DEVAPPA
S/O NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC: NIL, DANDAMBALLI
#4-9, BUDDHA NAGAR BIRANUR,
TQ. SHAHAPUR,
DIST. YADGIRI-585304
8.
SANTOSH KUMAR B.
S/O NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
H.NO.127, FIRST FLOOR,
SUVARNAKAMALA
OPP. CADA OFFICE,
MALAVAGOPPA
SHIVAMOGGA-577 222
- 3 -
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7539
WP No. 202012 of 2021
C/W WP No. 201999 of 2021
9.
SANTOSHKUMAR S/O NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
PLOT NO.61, SHIVA NILAYA
SAI LAYOUT, SHAKTI NAGAR,
KALABURAGI-585103
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.ARATI PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SHARANABASAPPA K. BABSHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. R.J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI.SANTOSH B.PATIL, ADVOCATE R4, R6, R7, & R8;
SRI. GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R9)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED
FINAL
SELECTION
LIST
NOTIFICATION
BEARING
NO.PSC/720/RTB(2)/2017-18/1344,
DATED
23.09.2021
VIDE
ANNEXURE-J ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT INSOFAR AS NON-
SELECTION OF THE PETITIONER AND SELECTION OF THE PRIVATE
RESPONDENTS HEREIN BY DECLARING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL AND
ETC.,
IN WP NO.201999 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
SHIVKUMAR S/O MARUTI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. VITHALPUR, POST. MEENKERA,
TQ. CHITGUPPA,
DIST. BIDAR-585227.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MAHESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
- 4 -
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7539
WP No. 202012 of 2021
C/W WP No. 201999 of 2021
2.
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION SOCIETY,
(A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT),
AN ORGANIZATION OF
SOCIAL WELFARE
DEPARTMENT, NO.8,
MSB-1, 6TH AND 7TH FLOOR,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BENGALURU-560052.
3.
THE KARNATAKA PUBLIC
SERVICE COMMISSION
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
UDYOG SOUDHA, PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001.
4.
NAGARAJ S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
R/O. NAGARAGUNDA,
TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR-584111.
5.
SHIVAPPA S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCC: NIL, AT POST. SANGANUR,
TQ. AFZALPUR,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585265.
6.
DEVINDRA MIJEJI
S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
R/O AT POST. KAWALAGA (B),
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
7.
MAHANTESH GHANUR
S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
SHARANABASAVA JR.
COLLEGE OF SCIENCE,
SHORAPUR, DIST. YADGIRI-585215.
- 5 -
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7539
WP No. 202012 of 2021
C/W WP No. 201999 of 2021
8.
SURYAKANTA S/O HANUMANTH
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
AT. KUTOOR,
POST. KAWALAGARGA, TQ. JEWARGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585310.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.ARATI PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SHARANABASAPPA K. BABSHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.R.J.BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. SANTHOSH B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
R-5 TO R7 ARE SERVED
PETITION AGAINST R-8 IS DISMISSED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED
FINAL
SELECTION
LIST
NOTIFICATION
BEARING
NO.PSC/720/RTB(2)/2017-18/1344,
DATED
23.09.2021
VIDE
ANNEXURE-J ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT INSOFAR AS NON-
SELECTION OF THE PETITIONER AND SELECTION OF THE PRIVATE
RESPONDENTS HEREIN BY DECLARING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL AND
ETC.,
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
In these writ petitions, the petitioners are assailing
the Final selection list notification dated 23.09.2021
(Annexure-J) issued by respondent No.3 selecting the
private respondents to the post of Social Science Teacher
as illegal and contrary to law inter alia sought for
- 6 -
appointment of petitioners to the post of Social Science
Teacher in terms of the notification dated 23.06.2017.
2.
Relevant facts for the adjudication of these writ
petitions are that the petitioners made applications for the
post of Social Science Teacher in terms of the notification
dated 23.06.2017 (Annexure-A). Pursuant to the same,
the petitioners have participated in the selection process
and the names of the petitioners were short listed by the
respondent-KPSC as per Annexure-D. The petitioners
have also stated that the petitioners have scored more
marks than the private respondents herein as per
Annexure-E.
The
respondent-KPSC
has
notified
the
provisional selection list dated 22.06.2021 (Annexure-F in
W.P.No.202012/2021) but, the names of the petitioners
did not find place in the provisional list. The petitioners
filed objections to the provisional selection list, however,
the respondent-KPSC has issued the final selection list
dated 23.09.2021 (Annexure-J) notifying the selection of
the private respondents despite the fact that the
- 7 -
petitioners contended that the private respondents are not
qualified to be appointed to the post in terms of the
notification dated 23.06.2017 (Annexure-A). Hence, these
writ petitions are filed.
3.
Heard
Sri.Mahesh
Patil,
learned
counsel
appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Arati Patil, learned High
Court
Government
Pleader,
Sri.Sharanabasappa
K.Babshetty, Sri.R.J.Bhusare and Sri.Santosh B. Patil,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
4.
Sri.Mahesh Patil, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners argued that the petitioners have passed
relevant degree in the medium of Kannada, like the
private respondents herein and the names of the
petitioners have been notified in the short-list as per
Annexure-D however, case of the petitioners has not been
considered by the respondent authorities while issuing
final selecting list and therefore, non-selection of the
petitioners amounts to discrimination and accordingly,
sought for interference of this Court.
- 8 -
5.
Sri.Mahesh Patil, learned counsel further invited
the attention of the Court to the documents produced by
the private respondents herein particularly, referring to
Annexure-R12 of the statement of objections filed by
respondent No.6 in W.P.No.202012/2021 and argued that
the respondent authorities have appointed the private
respondents though they have studied in the medium of
Kannada which is contrary to the notification issued by the
respondent-KPSC. In this regard, he also emphasized on
the
letter
dated
13.07.2021
(Annexure-L
in
W.P.No.202012/2021) issued by Vijayanagara University
stating
that
one
of
the
private
respondents
i.e.,
respondent No.6 in W.P.No.202012/2021 has studied in
the medium of Kannada and accordingly, sought for
interference of this Court.
6.
Per contra, Sri.R.J.Bhusare, learned counsel
appearing
for
the
respondent-KPSC
reiterates
the
averments made in the statement of objections and
contended that the selection process has been made in
- 9 -
terms of the notification produced at Annexure-A and the
selection process has been completed. Therefore, no
interference is called for in these writ petitions. He also
submitted that particulars of the selected candidates was
sent to respondent No.2 herein for verification of the
documents and on their instructions, the selection process
has been completed and accordingly, he sought for
dismissal of the writ petitions.
7.
Sri.Santosh B.Patil, learned counsel appearing
for the private respondents reiterates the averments made
in the statement of objections and contended that though
respondent No.6 has stated in the application produced at
Annexure-R8 that respondent No.6
