Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 34200

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Vibhu Bakhru, CJ, C M Joshi, J
Jagannath Olekar – Appellant
Versus
University Of Agricultural Sciences – Respondent
WRIT APPEAL NO.1671 OF 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M.S. Bhagwat, Satish K.
For the Respondents: M Sreenivasa

Transfers within an organization are permissible if they do not result in demotion, pay loss, or violation of service conditions. An employee who consistently avails benefits associated with a specific academic designation is estopped from denying that status or its corresponding transfer liabilities.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Transfer of employees - Whether transfer to a post with a higher grade constitutes an infringement of service conditions - Held, that a transfer to a post of a higher grade that does not involve reduced pay or diminished status does not violate protection against arbitrary action (Paras 18, 19, 23).

(B) Service Law - Definition of academic staff - Whether an employee under a research scheme qualifies as a teacher - Held, that duties involving research, extension, and academic guidance, coupled with previous promotional submissions claiming such status, confirm the designation as part of the academic faculty (Paras 25, 27, 28).

(C) Administrative Law - Transfer of Service - Allegation of requirement for external consultation - Where terms and conditions of appointment strictly govern service matters, no mandatory obligation exists to consult third-party funding agencies for internal transfers (Paras 30, 31).

Facts of the case:
An employee challenged a transfer order on the grounds that the destination post was not equivalent to their current position and that the transfer required external consultation. The employee further claimed they were not categorized as academic faculty and therefore exempt from certain service conditions. The lower court dismissed the petition, confirming the employee's appointment status and the validity of the transfer.

Findings of Court:
The transfer was to a post with a higher academic grade, resulting in no adverse consequences, pay loss, or degradation of status. The evidence of the employee's prior claims for academic promotional credit effectively estopped them from denying their status as teaching staff.

Issues: Whether transfer to a non-equivalent, higher-grade post is permissible; whether an employee under an external research project constitutes faculty for statutory purposes; and whether internal transfers necessitate consent from external funding bodies.

Ratio Decidendi: Transfers are legitimate exercises of administrative authority provided they do not cause civil consequences or violate established service rules. An employee cannot claim specific designation benefits while simultaneously disclaiming the corresponding service obligations, such as liability for transfer.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. grounds for challenging administrative transfer orders in universities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 6)
2. factual context regarding employment, promotion schemes, and prior litigation. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
3. requirement of equivalence in post transfers and executive service rules. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
4. definition of 'teacher' faculty status and qualification requirements. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
5. extraneous consultation requirements and university administrative jurisdiction. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
6. dismissal of appeal and compliance with valid administrative orders. (Para 35 , 36)

---

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.09.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.18766/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION No.18766/2024 AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

C.A.V. JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The appellant has filed the present intra-court appeal, impugning an order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.18766/2024 (S-RES) captioned 'Dr. Jagannath Olekar v. University of Agricultural Sciences' ['impugned order'].

2. The appellant had filed the afore-mentioned writ petition impugning an order dated 08.07.2024 as well as an order dated 09.07.2024 modifying the aforesaid order [impugned transfer orders], whereby the appellant was directed to report at Vishweswaraya Canal Farm, Mandya [V.C. Farm], for assuming the charge as a Professor in his own pay-scale.

3. The appellant challenges the impugned transfer orders on two grounds. First that the appellant was transferred from the respondent / University, Bangalore, to V.C. Farm on a post, which was not equivalent to the post at which he was serving. According to him, his transfer to a post that was not equivalent to the post, which he was holding is not permissible.

4. Second, that the appellant's transfer was ordered without consultation with the Central Government. The appellant also contends that he does not have any teaching experience and therefore, could not be considered as part of the teaching faculty or a ‘Teacher’ under Section 30(1) of The Universities of Agricultural Sciences Act, 2009 [UAS Act].

5. The learned Single Judge did not accept the said contentions. The learned Single Judge accepted the respondent's contention that the appellant was appointed as an Assistant Professor and therefore was a part of the teaching faculty. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge rejected the appellant's contention that he was not qualified to hold the post of Professor at V.C. Farm, Mandya.

6. Apart from the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge, the learned counsel for the appellant also pointed out that in terms of a Cabinet decision dated 13.01.2025, an order dated 28.01.2025 was passed and a new Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences University (Integrated University), has been established at V.C. Farm in Mandya District. Thus, the V.C. Farm is no longer a part of the respondent / University, but is now a separate University – Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences University, Mandya. He contended that, therefore, in any event, the appellant cannot be posted to another University.

PREFATORY FACTS:

7. The respondent / University issued a notification inviting applications in the prescribed format from candidates for several teaching posts in the respondent / University, Bangalore. The same included posts of Assistant Professor Cadre Posts (ICAR Schemes) in the subjects of i) Agronomy; ii) Soil Science & Agricultural (Agril.) Chemistry; iii) Genetics & Plant Bree

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 34200

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAVibhu Bakhru, CJ, C M Joshi, JJagannath Olekar – AppellantVersusUniversity Of Agricultural Sciences – RespondentWRIT APPEAL NO.1671 OF 2024

Cases Referred (3)

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Vibhu Bakhru, CJ, C M Joshi, J
Jagannath Olekar – Appellant
Versus
University Of Agricultural Sciences – Respondent
WRIT APPEAL NO.1671 OF 2024