IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 825 OF 2023 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPT. OF LAW JUSTICE (HUMAN RIGHTS)

VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION PALACE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001

3 . THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION MANGALURU-575 001 ...APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA)

AND:

1 . RAVI U.

S/O U. SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS WORKING AS ATTENDER VAIKUNTA BALIGA COLLEGE OF LAW KUNJIBETTU UDUPI-576 102

2 . VAIKUNTA BALIGA COLLEGE OF LAW REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL KUNJIBETTU UDUPI-576 102 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SATISH K., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

R2- SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO (a) CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND (b) SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 04.02.2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.13340/2018 (S-RES) BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 24.09.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

This appeal is preferred against the order dated

04.02.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.13340/2018 (S-RES).

2. We have heard Smt. Shwetha Krishnappa, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants and Shri. Satish. K, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1.

3. The writ petitioner/respondent No.1 had sought for a direction to bring the petitioner within the ambit of grant-in-aid at the hands of the State Government with retrospective date from 26.08.2015.

4. The petitioner was appointed as an attender in Vaikunta Baliga College of Law ('Institution' for short) on 14.11.1992 while the Institution was an unaided Private Educational Institution. The State Government extended grant-in-aid to the Institution by an order dated 26.08.2015. The employees who were not entitled to the grant-in-aid were specifically mentioned in the order itself. The petitioner's name did not figure in the said list. However, one post of attender was treated as Backlog Vacancy to be filled up by Scheduled Caste candidate by the said order. When the petitioner sought for benefit of grant-in-aid, an order was passed rejecting the same and holding that since one post of attender is set apart for filling by appointment of a Scheduled Caste candidate, the benefit cannot be extended to the petitioner. The same was challenged by the petitioner before this Court.

5. The learned Single Judge on considering the contentions advanced found that the question which requires a consideration is whether the vacancies that existed prior to the Institution coming within the ambit of grant-in-aid are required to be filled up following the roster prepared by the State Government for implementing communal reservation. Relying on the judgment dated 29.04.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.10955/2012, the learned Single Judge held in the negative. It was found that the State had implemented the judgment dated 29.04.2015 by its order dated 21.01.2017 and that the writ petitioner in the instant case cannot be denied the benefits of grant-in-aid.

6. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants, however, contends that the Institution would be entitled to grant-in-aid only when the conditions of communal reservation are complied with. Referring to ground 9 raised in this Writ Appeal, it is contended that one post of attender was found to be a Backlog Post to be filled up by a Scheduled Caste candidate and since the Institution had initiated the process for selection of Scheduled Caste candidate to the said po