A temporary administrative posting to a different role at the instance of the employer should not deprive an employee of service weightage benefits under recruitment regulations applicable to their primary substantive post.

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN Ka.Va.Shi.Sa.Sa/Adalitha/Ho.Ne/C.R.-1/2014-15 DTD 01.03.2021 VIDE ANNX-J AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(a) By issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ order as the case may be, quash the impugned Endorsement issued by the Respondent in No.Ka.Va.Shi.Sa.Sa/ Adalitha/Ho.Ne/C.R.-1/2014-15, dated 01.03.2021, Annexure-J;

(b) By issue of a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order as the case may be, direct the respondent to re-consider. The cases of the petitioner for regularization / selection, as per the Judgment of this Hon’ble Court as per Annexure-H, in W.P.No.27266/2018, dated 17.11.2020;

(c) Grant such other relief or reliefs that this Hon’ble Court deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost of this petition.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Master, Kannada language on 03.10.2006 and continued to work as an Assistant Master in Kannada upto 31.07.2010. Subsequently, during the period from 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012, the Deputy Commissioner posted the petitioner as First Division Assistant from 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012 and in the W.P.No.32496-32498/2011, this Court passed an interim order of status quo dated 25.08.2011, on the basis of which the petitioner was continued as an Assistant Master (Kannada Teacher) at Morarji Desai Residential School. Subsequently, the petitioner requested the respondent to consider grant of weightage under the Recruitment Regulations, 2011 which was rejected by the respondent vide included endorsement at Annexure-J dated 01.03.2021, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this court by way of the present petition.

4. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was only at the instance of the District Officer that the petitioner, who was appointed as a Kannada Teacher was subsequently posted as an FDA and merely because the petitioner was posted as FDA during the period 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012, after which the petitioner continued to work as a Kannada Teacher, even till today. It is submitted that merely because the petitioner was not working as a Kannada teacher during the period from 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012, when the aforesaid Recruitment Regulations, 2011 came into force, the benefit of service weightage under the said Regulations cannot be denied in favour of the petitioner and as such, the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of 5 marks per year and the impugned endorsement deserves to be quashed.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. A perusal of the impugned endorsement will indicate that the sole ground on which the petitioner has been denied the benefit of the service weightage as specified in the Recruitment Regulations is by holding that the petitioner had not secured the requisite marks by excluding the period from 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner was merely posted to do the work of the FDA for a brief period from 01.08.2010 to 14.08.2012, after which the petitioner was initially appointed as a Assistant Teacher (Kannada) and he continued to do the work of the Assistant Teacher (Kannada), the Recruitment Regulations, 2011 cannot be said to be not applicable to the petitioner and the petitioner was not posted as an FDA on his own reques