In an autonomous institution where deputation is a defined mode of recruitment, an employee absorbed in public interest is entitled to have their seniority reckoned from the date of initial deputation, provided they possessed the requisite qualifications at the time of their appointment.

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.39476/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT AND ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR.

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.28905/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT AND DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR.

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.22025/2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT AND ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR.

THESE WRIT APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 04.03.2026 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 T.M.NADAF

CAV JUDGMENT

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

All these appeals arise from a common judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 07.03.2023 rendered in a batch of Writ Petitions. The controversy which led to the litigation was with regard to the relative seniority of lecturers absorbed in the Government Dental College and Research Institute, while on deputation from the Health and Family Welfare Department and Lecturers directly recruited by the Government Dental College and Research Institute.

2. The main contention urged by the learned counsel for the appellants herein, who is a Direct Recruit is that respondent No.3 was not a member of the Cadre of Lecturers in the Institute and was entitled to seniority only from the date of her permanent absorption as a staff of the Institute. It is contended that respondent No.3 was not appointed by way of deputation in the Institute and the deputation was only an ad hoc arrangement until regular appointments were made. It is therefore contended that it is only on the date of absorption that respondent No.3 could be reckoned as being 'borne on the cadre' of Lecturers in the Institute and the reckoning of seniority on any earlier date would be illegal and erroneous.

3. We have heard Shri. Raghavendra G. Gayathri, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Smt. Savithramma, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State, Ms. Sumana Baliga, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 in Writ Appeals No.644/2023 and 773/2023 and for respondent No.3 in Writ Appeal No.788/2023 and Shri. Vijaykumar Bajentri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 in Writ Appeals No.644/2023 and 773/2023 and for respondent No.4 in Writ Appeal No.788/2023.

4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- Respondent No.3 was appointed as Dental Health Officer in the Department of Health and Family Welfare Services, Government of Karnataka, by Notification dated 12.01.2005. Thereafter, by Order dated 21.09.2005 issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department, respondent No.3 was sent on deputation before completion of her probationary period to Government Dental College to work as a Lecturer, in her own pay scale until further orders.

By Government Order dated 16.11.2006, the Government Dental College became an autonomous Institute under the Government