- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 104047 OF 2025 (S-PRO) BETWEEN: RAMANNA B. NANDI, AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. C/O. DR. C.D. KALASAGOUDAR, H.NO. 16, SIDDARODHA NILAYA, MRUTYUNJAY VIHAR, NEAR J.K. SCHOOL, HUBBALLI, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD 3 580 032. &PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, M.S.SBUILDING, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU 3 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS HOUSING COMMISSIONER III AND IV FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU 3 560 009. 3. KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, III AND IV FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU 3 560 009. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 08.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 IN NO. KAGRUMAM/AASHA/SEESHA/PR/03/2020-21 VIDE ANNEXURE M, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. B) ISSUE A WRIT OF RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Date: 2025.12.11 16:39:18 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 TO PROMOTE THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OF AEE WITH EFFECT FROM 01.01.2016 AS REQUESTED FOR BY THE PETITIONER UNDER HIS REPRESENTATIONS DATED 20.07.2018 AND 20.06.2020 VIDE ANNEXURES G AND H, RESPECTIVELY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: A. Issue a writ of Certiorari to quash impugned endorsement dated 08.04.2025 issued by the respondent no. 2 in no. KaGruMam/ Aasha/ Seesha/PR/03/2020-21 vide Annexure M, in the interest of justice and equity. B. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner to the post of AEE with effect from 01.01.2016 as requested for by the petitioner under his representations dated 20.07.2018 and 20.06.2020 vide Annexures G and H, respectively, in the interest of justice and equity. C. Pass such order or orders which this Hon9ble court deems fit and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner joins the service of the Karnataka Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as 8the Board9, for short) on 14.03.2000 as a Junior Engineer as he had the requisite qualification of a diploma. The petitioner was then promoted as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 Assistant Engineer on 29.10.2005. After which, the petitioner secured a B.Tech degree in Civil Engineering from the hands of the Karnataka State Open University. On the strength of the said B.Tech degree that he secures, he registers his claim for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The Departmental Promotion Committee recommends his candidature for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The petitioner then submits a representation to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer from the date on which he secures the B.Tech Civil Engineering degree i.e. 30.12.2014. That having not been considered the petitioner was at the doors of this Court in Writ Petition No.105406 of 2024. The said writ petition comes to be disposed with a direction to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law. The consideration has led the petitioner back before this Court, as the case of the petitioner comes to be rejected on the score that there were no vacancies and the B.Tech course that he has secured is not valid. 3. The learned counsel Sri. Girish Yadwad appearing for the petitioner would project that the petitioner's promotion to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 post of Assistant Executive Engineer on the strength of the degree at least be protected, as the respondent Board has promoted close to 40 people on the strength of a degree secured before the Open Universities. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that he was entitled to seniority from the date on which he secures the degree i.e. 30.12.2014 from the Karnataka State Open University. 4. Per contra, the counsels appearing for all the respondents in unison would submit that the degree secured from the hands of the Karnataka State Open University is not valid in terms of a Circular issued by the Government itself and, therefore, the petitioner would not become entitled to be considered in seniority from 30.12.2014. The learned counsel in unison would seek dismissal of the petition. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 6. The afore narrated facts are not in dispute. The issue lies in a narrow compass. Up to 30.12.2014 the service of the petitioner was completely in accordance with law. On 30.12.2014 the petitioner secures a degree of B.Tech from the Karnataka State Open University and then submits a representation to consider his case for promotion or place him in the seniority with effect from 30.12.2014 the date on which he secures the degree. That having not been considered the petitioner is before the Court as observed hereinabove. 7. The issue is, whether the degree secured at the hands of the Open University i.e. KSOU would be valid or otherwise. 8. The degrees have been invalidated by the Government by issuing a circular that the degrees secured from the hands of the Open University are not valid. Therefore, the degree that the petitioner secures being invalid cannot mean that the petitioner would derive any right from the degree so secured which is declared to be invalid. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17060 WP No. 104047 of 2025 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that plethora of persons from the Open Universities have been granted such promotion. If that be so, it cannot be that two wrongs would make a right. There is no concept of negative equality in law. In that light, petition does not deserve any interference at the hands of this Court with the impugned communication which is in consonance with law. 10. Finding no merit, the petition stands rejected. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Kmv CT-ASC