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

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI VENKATESHWARA REDDY B – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP/2140/2018



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF APRIL, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO.2140 OF 2018 [S-RES]

BETWEEN:

SRI VENKATESHWARA REDDY B,

S/O VENKATASWAMY REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,

WORKING AS MATHEMATICS TEACHER,

MURARJI DESAI MODEL RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL,

THIMMALAPURA, HOSAPETE TALUK,

BELLARY DISTRICT-583 222.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. NARAYAN V. YAJI, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY-I,

SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,

VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-1.

2.

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL

INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY,

(AN ORGANIZATION OF GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA)

#179, 3RD FLOOR, 1ST MAIN ROAD,

SHESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU-20.

R

2

3.

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR &

DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER,

SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR, KOTE, BELLARY,

BELLARY DISTRICT-583 101.

4.

SRI.NAGESH K

S/O

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

WORKING AS COMPUTER TEACHER,

AND PRESENTLY, INCHARGE PRINCIPAL,

MORARJI DESAI MODEL RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL,

THIMMLAPURA, HOSAPETE TALUK,

BELLARY DISTRICT-583 222.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ANTHONY R RODRIGUES, AGA FOR R1 & R3,

SRI. SUNIL DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2,

SRI. G.K.HIREGOUDER, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227

OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO

QUASH

THE

APPOINTING

ORDER

PASSED

BY

THE

1ST

RESPONDENT DATED 02.01.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has laid a challenge

to the order dated 02.01.2018 issued by the first Respondent

at Annexure-D and another consequential order dated

05.01.2018 issued by the second Respondent at Annexure-F,

3

whereby the fourth Respondent has been given the additional

charge of the Office of the Principal of the School in question.

2.

Brief facts stated are ;

(a)

Petitioner has been working as Mathematics

Teacher since 04.06.2012 at Murarji Desai Model Residential

School, Timmalapur Hospet Taluk in Bellari District. The

fourth Respondent happens to be a Computer Teacher with

effect from 11.06.2012 and thus, apparently he is junior to

the Petitioner;

(b)

The Post of Principal in the School fell vacant with

effect from 20.06.2016 since the regular incumbent Sri

Yogesh H. has been transferred to the School in Shivamogga

on personal request and that, the fourth Respondent has

been given the Additional charge of the post of Principal by

way of In-charge arrangement. The same is in challenge in

this Writ petition.

3.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner Sri

Narayana Yaji vehemently contends the Apex Court has ruled

4

that the Principal is the conscience keeper of the educational

institution

;

the

incumbent

has

onerous

powers

&

responsibilities which he can properly discharge only if he has

necessary eligibility and qualification prescribed by the Rules

for appointment to the post of Principal ; any Tom, Dick and

Harry cannot be made to sit in the post ; choice of the

candidate should be preceded by the consideration of

candidature of persons in the fray.

4.

Mr. Narayan V. Yaji also contends that the

Petitioner is senior to the fourth Respondent and that

Petitioner is eligible and qualified for being promoted to the

post Principal going by the norms and qualifications for

appointment to that post. He further contends that the fourth

Respondent apart from being Junior to the Petitioner is not

eligible and qualified for being appointed/promoted to the

post of Principal and therefore, Petitioner ought to have been

given the post of Principal by way of In-charge arrangement.

5

5.

The learned counsel Mr. Narayan V. Yaji in

support of his contention banks upon the provisions of Rule

32 of KCSR relevant portion of which

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