IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 84515 OF 2013 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

DR. MANIK S/O. MANOHAR SHINDE AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE R/O. KUD QUARTERS, PAVATE NAGAR, DHARWAD.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIKANT T. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SHRI. SIDDANNA S/O. NINGAPPA RAMAPURA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, R/O. DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY, BASAVESHWAR ARTS COLLEGE, BAGALKOT. 2. SHRI. BASAVESHWAR ARTS COLLEGE, BAGALKOT, R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL, VEERAPPA S/O. KALLAPPA MORABAD VISHAL NINGAPPA AGE: 62 YEARS, PATTIHAL R/O. STAFF QUARTERS, Digitally signed by BASAVESHWAR COLLEGE, BAGALKOT.

VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT M. S. BUILDING, BANGALORE.

4. THE COMMISSIONER OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION SHESHADRI ROAD, BANGALORE-01.

5. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION SHESHADRI ROAD, BANGALORE-01.

6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, DHARWAD REGION, DHARWAD.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. J. S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. S.B. HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R3 TO R6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO:

A) A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER NO.ED:72:UPC:2012 DATED 22.05.2012 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER ANNEXURE-K.

B) A WRIT OF MANDAMUS BE ISSUED TO RECRUIT THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OF BACKLOG ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN HISTORY IN RESPONDENT NO.2 COLLEGE VIDE NOTIFICATION DATED 11/12/2012 AS PER ANNEXURE-A and etc.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner seeks the following prayer:

A) A writ of certiorari to quash the order No.ED:72:UPC:2012 dated 22.05.2012 passed by respondent No.3 in favour of respondent No.1 as per Annexure-K.

B) A writ of Mandamus be issued to recruit the petitioner to the post of Backlog Assistant Professor in History in respondent No.2 college vide notification dated

11/12/2012 as per Annexure-A and etc.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Shrikant T. Patil, appearing for petitioner, learned counsel Sri.J.S.Shetty, appearing for respondent No.1 and learned HCGP-Smt.Girija Hiremath, appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 6.

3. The petitioner is said to be a stranger to the proceedings, who calls in question the regularisation or continuance of appointment of the first respondent in the second respondent institution. It is the case of the petitioner that the regularisation of the first respondent has happened contrary to law, for the reason that no reservation policy was followed or otherwise. The petitioner is neither in employment nor was a contestant against the first respondent for appointment or regularisation as the case would be.

4. The State Government has preferred its detailed statement of objections. The Learned HCGP taking this court through the statement of objections would seek to demonstrate that the petitioner is in no way concerned with the second respondent institution and has projected the subject petition which is in the nature of a public interest petition. Therefore, the petitioner has no locus to challenge the regularisation of the first respondent.

5. There is no warrant to keep the petition pending for the satisfaction of the petitioner that the petition is pending till today. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan NoorKhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra and others, (2013) 4 SCC 465, wherein the Apex Court has held that a person who has no locus cannot maintain a writ petition to challenge the appointment of others. The relevant paragraph reads as follows:

“9. It is a settled legal proposition that a stranger cannot be permitted to meddle in any proceeding, unless he satisfies the authority/court, that he falls within the category of ag