SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 26846

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


NC: 2026:KHC:25425


WP No. 9759 of 2021


BETWEEN:

SRI M. SEETHARAM

S/O LATE M. KRISHNAMURTHY,

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

DEPUTY REGISTRAR (INDEPENDENT CHARGE)

KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY,

JNANA SAHYADRI,

SHANKARAGHATTA,

BHADRAVATHI TALUK,

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 451

…PETITIONER

AND:

1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR

KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY,

JAYANA SAYADHRI,

SHANKARA GHATTA,

SHIVAMOGGA – 577 451

2. THE DIRECTOR

TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,

LOTUS TOWERS,

POORNA PRASAD ROAD,

MADHAVANAGAR,

GANDHI NAGAR,

BANGALORE – 560 001

…RESPONDENTS


(BY SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A., ADVOCATE)

(BY SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. C. JAGADEESHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)


BEFORE: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR


DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2026

WRIT PETITION NO. 9759 OF 2021 (S-DIS)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 DTD. 15.04.2021 IN ORDER NO.KU.VI:MASANI-2:115:2021-22 (Dz Éñ À ¸ ÀAS Éå : PÀÄ« : ª ÀiÁ¸ À¤ - 2:115:2021-22) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A DURING THE PENDENCY OF ABOVE WRIT PETITION.

THIS PETITION IS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED ON 12.03.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

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

CAV ORDER

1. In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 15.04.2021 in Order No.KU VI: MASANI-2: 115 : 2021-22 (DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå: PÀÄ«: ªÀiÁ¸À¤-2:115:2021-22) dismissing the petitioner from service vide Annexure-A.

(ii) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner was appointed as a Second Division Clerk on 26.10.1989 in Kuvempu University against a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe (ST) Community based on a Caste Certificate, which showed that he belonged to “Maleru / Maaleru” which was a notified Scheduled Tribe and the petitioner continued to work in the Kuvempu University. On 18.11.2015, the District Caste Verification Committee (DCVC), Udupi, constituted under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment Etc.,) Act, 1990 (for short ‘the said Act of 1990’) cancelled the Caste Certificate of the petitioner, who approached this Court in W.P.No.52826/2015, which was disposed of on 08.01.2016 by continuing the interim stay for a period of four weeks and granting liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority. Accordingly, petitioner filed an appeal in Appeal No. CR 12/2015-16 before the 2nd respondent – Appellate Authority, who allowed the said appeal vide order dated 30.11.2019 and remitted the matter back to the DCVC for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law. Meanwhile, the Tahsildar passed one more order dated 15.03.2016 cancelling the petitioner’s caste certificate, which was assailed by the petitioner in W.P.No.19176/2016 which was allowed and disposed of by this Court vide final order dated 06.02.2019, whereby the aforesaid order passed by the Tahsildar was set aside on the grounds of violations of principles of natural justice and the matter was remitted back to the competent authority for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

3. In pursuance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court in W.P.No.52826/2016 dated 08.01.2016 and W.P.No.19176/2016 dated 06.02.2019 as well as the aforesaid order passed by the 2nd respondent – Appellate Authority in Appeal No.CR 12/2015-16, the DCVC once again passed an order dated 30.03.2021 cancelling the petitioner’s Caste Certificate. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the DCVC dated 30.03.2021 cancelling his Caste Certificate, petitioner filed a statutory appeal on 08.04.2021 under Section 4D of the said Act of 1990 before the 2nd respondent – Appellate Authority along with an application for stay of the order of the DCVC dated 30.03.2021. Subsequently, the 1st respondent, who is the Vice Chancellor of the Kuvempu University proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 15.04.2021 dismissing the petitioner from service, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondents and perused the material on record.

5. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent – Vice Chancellor did not have jurisdiction or authority of law to dismiss the petitioner from

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top