SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NO.10615/2022 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

DR. SANGAMESH PATIL A

S/O SRI AMARAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

R/AT PALLAVI PLOT NO.23,

1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS,

ULAVI CHANNABASAVESHWARANAGAR,

DHARWAD- 580007.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, SR.COUNSEL A/W

SRI K GOVINDARAJ, ADV.)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,

M S BUILDING,

BENGALURU-560001.

2. THE CHANCELLOR

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY,

RAJ BHAVAN,

BANGALORE-560001.

3. THE REGISTRAR

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY,

2

JNANABHARATI CAMPUS,

BANGALORE-560056.

4. DR. JAYAKAR S.M.

MAJOR BY AGE

VICE CHANCELLOR

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

JNANABHARATHI NEAR NAGARABHAVI

BANGALORE-560 072.

5. DR. VENUGOPAL K.R.

FORMER VICE CHANCELLOR

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

NOW R/AT JNANABHARATHI

NEAR NAGARABHAVI

BANGALORE-560 072.

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI R SUBRAMANYA, AAG. A/W

SRI M.V. RAMESH JOIS, AGA FOR R1

SRI B.N.AMBRISH, ADV. FOR R2

SRI T.P. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADV. FOR R3-R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING

THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATION IN E-NO. ED/122/UBV/2022

DATED 20.05.2022 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-E;

QUASHING

THE

IMPUGNED

WRITTEN

COMMUNICATION

PASSED BY THE R-1 ADDRESSED TO R-3 IN COMMUNICATION

BEARING

ED

272

UBV

2022

DATED

20.05.2022

VIDE

ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

3

Advocates:
['RAHAMATHULLA KOTHWAL', '', 'GOVINDARAJ K', 'NAGARALE SANTOSH SUBHASHCHANDRA', 'RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY T P']

The petitioner-former Professor of Chemistry is before

this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned

notification

bearing

E-No.ED/122/UBV/2022

dated

20.05.2022;

quash

the

impugned

communication

by

respondent No.1 addressed to respondent No.3 bearing No.ED

272 UBV 2022 dated 20.05.2022 (Annexure-F); quash the

impugned advertisement published in the newspapers dated

21.05.2022 (Annexure-G); for a writ of mandamus directing

respondent No.2/University to publish the notification

inviting applications to fill up the post of Vice-Chancellor; to

quash the notification bearing No.GS 11 BUM 2022 dated

11.07.2022 (Annexure-A1) and for a writ of mandamus

directing the respondents not to proceed further in the

selection process of Vice-Chancellor of Bangalore University,

until disposal of the special leave petition pending before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court and for a direction to the second

respondent-University to pay a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- from

4

June 2018 till the petitioner is appointed as Vice-Chancellor

of Bangalore University or till such time as this Court deems

fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

Heard learned senior counsel Sri.Ravindranath Kamath

along

with

Sri.K.Govindaraj,

learned

counsel

for

the

petitioner;

learned

Additional

Advocate

General

Sri.R.Subramanya along with learned AGA Sri.M.V.Ramesh

Jois

for

respondent

No.1

and

learned

counsel

Sri.B.N.Ambarish, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and

learned

counsel

Sri.T.P.Rajendra

Kumar

Sungay

for

respondent Nos.3 to 5. Perused the writ petition papers.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that, the first respondent-

Government and Chancellor of Universities under notification

dated 12.06.2018 (Annexure-A) in exercise of powers

conferred under sub-Section (4) of Section 14 of the

Karnataka State University Act, 2000 (for short <2000 Act=)

appointed 5th respondent Dr. Venugopal K.R. as Vice-

Chancellor of Bangalore University, Bangalore for a period of

5

4 years with effect from the date of assumption of office or till

he attains the age of 67 years, whichever is earlier. The

petitioner, aggrieved by the said notification appointing 5th

respondent as Vice-Chancellor of Bangalore University was

before this Court in W.P.No.55552/2018 and this Court, by

order dated 24.09.2019 quashed the notification dated

12.06.2019 by which, respondent No.5 was appointed as

Vice-Chancellor of Bangalore University. Aggrieved by the

order of learned Single judge, all the respondents i.e.,

respondent No.5, State Government, Chancellor as well as

University filed W.A.No.3779/2019 and other connected

Appeals. The Division Bench of this Court by its order dated

16.03.2022 dismissed the Writ Appeals affirming the order of

the learned Single judge. Against the order passed by the

learned Single judge as well as judgment of the Division

Bench, 5th respondent approached the Hon'ble Apex Court in

SLP Nos.5254-5256/2022. The Hon'ble Apex Court, by order

dated 04.04.2022 stayed the operation and implementation of

the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 16.03.2022

6

and respondent No.5 continued to function as Vice-

Chancellor of Bangalore University. In the meanwhile, the

term of office of the 5th respondent as Vice-Chancellor of

Bangalore University came to an end on 12.06.2022. Well

before the date of expiry of tenure of 5th respondent as Vice-

Chancellor of Bangalore University, the Government initiated

process of selection of Vice-Chancellor of Bangalore University

by constituting Search Committee under Notification dated

20.05.2022, and also on the same day, issued notification

inviting

applications

from

the

eligible

distinguished

Academicians/Professors. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Supreme

Court on 18.07.2022, disposed of the SLP with an observation

that since the Appellant i.e., respondent No.5 herein, had

served out the entire term as Vice-Chancellor, there would be

no occasion in that event to appoint the fir

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top