- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 38695 OF 2013 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI K NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O KARIYAPPA R/AT CHAMANAHALLI KANVA POST,CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-571501. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S RAJESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS (ADMINISTRATION) GOVT. BOYS PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE NEW BUILDING RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT RAMANAGARA-571511. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 4. THE SERETARY RURAL RESIDENTIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY HULIKATTA, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-571511. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER, AGA. FOR R1-3 SRI. CHARAN KUMAR K V, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-B DATED 26.11.2008 PASSED BY THE R3 BY CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned orders - Annexure - B dated 26.11.2008, Annexure – H dated 18.10.2011 and Annexure-J dated 02.07.2013, on the ground that the service of the petitioner has not been approved to the post of Hindi Assistant Teacher in the fourth respondent – Institution. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he has acquired the qualification of Hindi B.Ed. from the Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad. The fourth respondent – Education - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 Institution appointed the petitioner to the post of Hindi Assistant Teacher as per Annexure-A dated 22.10.1997. Thereafter, the fourth respondent – Institution sent the list of teachers for approval of salary grant. By the impugned order, dated 26.11.2008, vide Annexure-B, the case of the petitioner for appointment as Hindi Assistant Teacher has been rejected, in respect of other teachers, the same has been approved. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent. The second respondent, by order dated 18.10.2011 vide Annexure-H, dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, he filed a revision before the first respondent. The first respondent, by order dated 02.07.2013 vide Annexure-J dismissed the revision. Being aggrieved by the impugned orders vide Annexures B, H and J the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner obtained Hindi B.Ed., degree from Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad and the same is equivalent to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 the Hindi B.Ed. in Karnataka. Therefore, he is entitled to be appointed as Hindi Assistant Teacher. But the respondents erred in rejecting the approval of his name. He further contended that even the State Government has issued the notification on 20.02.1996 stating that Hindi B.Ed. degree obtained from Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad is equivalent to Hindi B.Ed. course in Karnataka. Without considering this aspect of the matter the respondent erred in rejecting the case of the petitioner for approval as Hindi Assistant Teacher. Hence, he sought for allowing of the writ petition. 4. The learned AGA appearing for the State has contended that even though the Government has issued the notification on 20.02.1996 treating Hindi B.Ed., degree obtained from Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad is equivalent to Hindi B.Ed., course at Karnataka, the said order has been withdrawn on 03.07.1996. The petitioner joined the service on 22.02.1997. As on that date, the Government Order dated 20.02.1996 was not in force. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 Therefore, his case cannot be considered for approval to the post of Hindi Assistant Teacher. Therefore, the Government has rightly rejected the proposal sent by the Management. The same has been rightly confirmed by the appellate authority as well as the revisional authority. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has secured B.Ed., in Hindi from Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has been appointed by the fourth respondent – Institution as Hindi Assistant Teacher on 22.10.1997. The Government issued a Notification dated 20.02.1996 treating Hindi B.Ed. degree obtained from Hindi Prachara Sabha, Hyderabad as equivalent to the Hindi B.Ed., degree in Karnataka and the said notification has been withdrawn on 03.07.1996. As on the date of the appointment of the petitioner as Hindi Assistant Teacher in the fourth respondent – Institution, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19064 WP No. 38695 of 2013 the Notification dated 20.02.1996 has been withdrawn. As per the Rules, to be eligible for appointment as Hindi Assistant Teacher, as on the date of the appointment, the person has to obtain a Hindi B.Ed., degree from a recognized institution in Karnataka. Since the petitioner has not obtained the said qualification as required under the Rules, the respondents have rightly not considered the case of the petitioner for approval of his post as Hindi Assistant Teacher. Therefore, the appellate authority as well as the revisional authority, by the impugned orders vide Annexures H and J have rejected the appeal as well as the revision. 7. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the respondents. The writ petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 64