- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 100871 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. IRANAGOUDA B. BIRADAR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (HISTORY), KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY, R/O: JAMES HOUSE, P.B. ROAD, DHARWAD. 2. DR. KUMUDA N. KAROGAL, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (ENGLISH), KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY, R/O: KOPP COMPOUND, MALAMADI, DHARWAD. 3. SRI. GIRISHGOUDA G. PATIL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MANAGEMENT), KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY, R/O: NEAR KPTCL OFFICE, TABIB LAND, HUBBALLI. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SUNIL S. DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580 025, DIST: DHARWAD-580 001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1-R2; SRI. S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR HEARING- INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Sunil S.Desai., counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil., HCGP for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.S.S.Beturmath., counsel for Sri.K.L.Patil., counsel for respondent No.3 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the communication bearing No.LAW- KLM/85/2023 dated 18.05.2024 vide Annexure-G, the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 communication bearing No.LAW-KLM/85/2023 dated 22.08.2024 vide Annexure-J, and the communication bearing No.LAW-KLM/85/2023 dated 09.01.2025 vide Annexure-L issued by respondent No.1 as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The short facts are these: The Karnataka Law University was approved/ sanctioned for the appointment of 41 Assistant Professor Posts by the Government with the concurrence of the financial department. The university notified 24 posts of temporary full-time assistant-professor in different subjects by widely publishing in all the newspapers throughout Karnataka. The petitioners applied for the temporary full-time assistant-professor post along with relevant documents for the subject Physical Education. The Board of Appointment selected the petitioners after the interview and placed the list before the syndicate for approval and the syndicate also approved the same. Accordingly, the petitioners joined the service and working at the University since 2010. It is submitted that the petitioners are appointed temporary full-time lecturers and continuously working till today. Even the salary of the petitioners was paid - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 as per the state government scale. The petitioners have completed 13 years of service. The University throughout the service of the petitioners has assigned important service responsibility to the petitioners same as that of the responsibility discharged by the permanent staff of the University against sanctioned post. The University to file up of 10 law and non-law posts held a meeting of the roster committee on 17.04.2021, the committee taking note of earlier syndicate meeting in respect of roster point fixed roster points to 10 posts. The University as per the roster point decided to fill up the posts and called the applications from the eligible candidates by notification dated 12.08.2021 and the same was re-notified on 13.10.2021. As per the said notification, the post of Assistant Director of Physical Education and Sports was assigned to the II-B category. Immediately, after coming to know the aforesaid order of this Court, the petitioners approached the University and requested to consider their case for regularization as assured by them and extend the benefit of the order of this Court in W.P. No.103466/2021 taking note of long-standing service has passed the order directing the respondents consider the representations of the petitioners - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 therein for regularization. Hence, the petitioners submitted their representations to the University for the same, but the representations were not considered as of today. Hence, the petitioners filed the present Writ petition. 4. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 5. The facts are sufficiently stated and they do not require reiteration. The short point that would arise for consideration is whether the decline of financial aid by the government is just and proper. 6. Suffice it to note that this Court vide order dated 07.06.2023 disposed of the writ petition and directed the University to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Others vs. Umadevi (3) and others. According to the order, the matter was placed before the syndicate and the syndicate approved and decided on the regularization of the petitioners consequently, the appointment orders were issued on - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 27.09.2023. Thereafter, the University requested the Government for financial aid. However, the Government communicated to the University stating that the University contested the matter in the writ petition and they could not have regularize the services of the petitioners. Hence, they rejected financial aid. This is untenable in law. 7. Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil., HCGP vehemently contends that the university contested the matter and hence it has no power to regularize the services of the petitioners. She argued by saying that the petitioners were appointed on a contract basis. Originally the Government had permitted the University to fill these posts by direct recruitment. However, the University has not abided by the direction and has erroneously regularized the services of the petitioners. Therefore, she justified the action on the part of the Government about the refusal of the financial aid. Lastly, she submitted that the communications are issued by the Government to the University, hence, the petitioners have no locus to question the same in the present Writ Petition. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 8. By way of answer to this question, Sri. Sunil Desai submits that the Government has not questioned the order of this Court and hence the contentions are untenable. Sri.S.S.Beturmath., counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the University has adhered to the order passed by this Court and regularized the services of the petitioners. He argued by saying that after the regularization of services of the petitioners, they sought financial aid from the Government. However, the Government has declined to grant the financial aid. Counsel, therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed. 9. The communications issued by the Government are furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same are marked as Annexures G, J and L. A perusal of the same would reflect that the Government refused/ declined to give the financial aid stating that the University contested the matter in Writ Petition No.103466/2021 hence, they cannot regularize the services of the petitioners. The reasons and the conclusion so arrived by the Government cannot be sustained. The order of this Court has attained finality. The Government was also the party to the proceedings and no appeal has been preferred by the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 Government. Furthermore, the University is an appointing authority and also has the power to regularize the services of the employees. In compliance with the order, the University has taken a decision and has regularized the services of the petitioners. The Government overlooked this aspect of the matter and erroneously declined to give financial aid to the University. The action on the part of the government cannot be sustained. Hence, the petitioners are entitled to the reliefs as sought in the writ petition. 10. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The communication bearing No.LAW-KLM/85/2023 dated 18.05.2024 vide Annexure-G, the communication bearing No.LAW-KLM/85/2023 dated 22.08.2024 vide Annexure-J and the communication bearing No.LAW-KLM/85/2023 dated 09.01.2025 vide Annexure-L issued by the first respondent are quashed. 11. A Mandamus is ordered directing the first respondent to extend the benefit of the grant in aid to the petitioners releasing the grants and also pay the arrears, if any - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4299 WP No. 100871 of 2025 without seeking further clarification from the University within 8 weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. 12. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE RH LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 23