- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.106711 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: DR. S.M.HURAKADLI S/O. MAHARUDRAPPA AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: NOW PROFESSOR AND CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY, RANI CHANNAMMA UNIVESITY, BELGAUM, R/O. PLOT NO. 100, SCHEME-13, SHIVA-PARVATI NILAY, T.V.CENTRE, BELGAUM-590001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (HIGHER ECUCATION), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001. 2. JOINT DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, DHARWAD-580008. 3. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 BANGALORE-560001. 4. THE COMMISSIONER FOR COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 5. KARNATAKA NORTHERN DIOCESE CHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA, B.M.H.E.C.S KITTEL COLLEGE, DHARWAD-580008, (BY ITS MANAGEMENT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; NOTICE TO R5 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.11.2013 BEARING NO.ED 203 UPC 2010 PASSED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-N AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO FIX AND PAY THE SALARY TO THE PETITIONER W.E.F. 24.06.1991 TO 23.10.1996 UNDER GRANT-IN-AID CODE AND COUNT THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER AS LECTURER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SENIORITY AND FOR INCREMENTS AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) In this petition, petitioner seeks the following beliefs: a) a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction, quashing the impugned order dated: 14.11.2013 bearing No. ED 203 UPC 2010 passed by the 1st Respondent produced at Annexure-N. b) a writ in nature of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction directing the Respondents to fix and pay the salary to the Petitioner w.e.f. 24.6.1991 to 23.10.1996 under Grant-in-Aid Code and count the services of the Petitioner as Lecturer for the purpose of seniority and for increments etc., in the interest of justice. c) such other writ or orders or direction may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case including an order for costs be issued in the interest of justice. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 to 4 and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 16.07.1987 the petitioner was appointed as a lecturer in the 5th respondent – institution, which was approved by the respondent No.2 on 30.03.1988 on a stop gap basis. On 23.05.1988, the 2nd respondent passed an order sanctioning one post of in Geography subject. Subsequently on 18.06.1988, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 2nd respondent issued a corrigendum / order modifying its earlier order dated 23.05.1988 and sanctioning two posts (instead of one post) in respect of Geography subject. Accordingly, the petitioner got transferred and joined Kittel College as a lecturer in Geography towards the sanctioned and aided post as per the permission sought by the 5th respondent on 24.06.1991. Thereafter, on 18.09.1991, the 5th respondent appointed the petitioner as a lecturer towards the sanctioned post and sought for approval from the 2nd respondent. 4. In pursuance of the said approval, the 5th respondent appointing the petitioner against the sanctioned post, the 2nd respondent sought for clarification, vide communication dated 05.09.1995 to which the 5th respondent submitted a reply dated 16.10.1995, pursuant to which, the 5th respondent addressed a communication dated 19.10.1995 to the 3rd respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a communication dated 22.10.1996 to the 5th respondent, subsequent to which, the 1st respondent recommended the case of the petitioner to be considered and to take action regarding fixation and payment of salary. However the claim of the petitioner having been rejected - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 by the 1st respondent vide order dated 27.04.2001, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.1965/2002, which was allowed by a detailed order and the matter was remitted back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. In fact, while allowing the said petition vide final order dated 20.12.2006, this Court upheld all claims and contentions of the petitioner and remitted the matter back to the 1st respondent by holding as under : “ORDER The petitioner assailing the correctness of the communication dated 27.04.2001 in No.ED.252 UPP 99 issued by the 1st respondent under Annexure-L and seeking a direction to the respondents to fix and pay the salary to the petitioner with effect from 24.6.1991 to 23.10.1996 under Grant-in-Aid Code and to count the services of the petitioner as lecturer for the purpose of seniority and increments etc, has presented this instant writ petition. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is, that the petitioner having all the requisite qualifications and eligible to the post of lecturer in Geography, applied for the said post in pursuance of the notification issued by the collegiate authorities dated 18.8.1988 (Annexure-C) and was selected vide an appointment order dated 30.3.1988 (Annexure-D). The notification-Annexure-C was issued after obtaining permission accorded By the Government dated 23.5.1998 vide Annexure-B. The petitioner, from the date of reporting to his duties, was discharging the duties as Lecturer in Geography in the said College. It is contended by the petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 that since the said post is an approved post it comes within the grant sanctioned by the Government. Earlier, the petitioner was working in S.R.N. Arts & M.B.S. Commerce College, Bagalkot, and he has been transferred to Kittel Arts College, Dharwad on 18.6.91 and he has joined for his duties on 24.6.1991. Before joining the service in SRN Arts & MBS Commerce College, Bagalkot, as a Lecturer in Geography the petitioner was working in Kittel Arts College, Dharwad, as a stop-gap lecturer during the academic year 1987-88. When there was shortage of one more post of lecturer in Geography in Kittel Arts College, Dharwad, they requested further sanction of one additional post and the said additional post was sanctioned by the Government vide its order dated 18.6.1988 permitting the college authorities to fill up two posts of lecturers in Geography instead of one. Accordingly the Selection Committee of the college selected the petitioner and another candidate for the said posts. Thereafter the college authorities forwarded the recommendation for approval as per Annexure-E, requesting the competent authority to approve the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Geography from 24.6.1991-the date on which he has joined the college. Thereafter, the college authorities also sent a letter dated 16.10.95 (Annexure-G) clarifying the objections raised by the Collegiate Education Department vide their letter dated 5.9.1995 (Annexure-F) and requested for approval of the petitioner's appointment. However, the 1st respondent, by his letter dated 27.4.2001 vide Annexure-L, informed that since the petitioner has been transferred from one college to another college and he has worked as a stop-gap-lecturer, his appointment cannot be approved and his salary cannot be released. Being aggrieved by the said communication dated 27.4.2001 (Annexure-L), the petitioner has presented this instant writ petition. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned AGA appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent no.5. 4. After careful perusal of the impugned communication it is manifest that the 1st respondent has committed grave error, muchless material irregularity and proceeded to issue the impugned endorsement without referring to the relevant materials available on record. It is significant to note that the Kittel College has forwarded its recommendation on 18.9.1991 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Geography against a clear vacancy and to release his salary and other consequential benefits with effect from 24.6.1991 the date when he joined the said college. During the pendency of the said approval by the department, the petitioner was selected and appointed as lecturer in Karnataka University P.G. Centre, Belgaum. Therefore, he requested the respondent no.5 college authorities to relieve him from his duties by granting him lean for a period of one year on the post which he was holding till the date of his release, as per Annexure- J. The respondents have failed to consider the material fact that after transfer of service of petitioner, respondent-5 college has appointed a new candidate in his place and he is drawing the salary under Government Aid. The 1st respondent who is the competent authority to exercise his powers vested under the statute has failed to take appropriate decision in accordance with law. The 1st respondent has failed to take note of the fact that the respondent no.2-authority has granted permission by his order dated 23.5.1988 (Annexure- B) and modified the said order by another order dated 10.06.1988 (Annexure-C) granting permission to fill up two posts of lecturers in Geography as per the Act because it is an aided institution and that the petitioner was selected and appointed to the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 said post on full time basis. Therefore, the communication issued by the 1st respondent authority stating that his approval cannot be considered ignoring the fact that it was an approved post by the department against a clear vacancy in the said college, is against the principles of natural justice and is one issued without application of mind. No proper reasons are assigned in the impugned communication/order for rejection of his approval and non-release of his salary for the said period. The 1st respondent ought to have conducted proper enquiry and taken a decision after affording reasonable opportunity to the respondent no.5- College to substantiate their case. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the instant writ petition filed by the petitioner is partly allowed. The impugned communication/order dated 27.4.2001 in No.ED 252 UPF.99 passed by the 1st respondent (Annexure-L) is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent authority with a direction to reconsider the matter afresh and to take appropriate decision in accordance with law in the light of the recommendation forwarded by the Kittle Arts College, Dharwad, vide their letter dated 18.9.1991 (Annexure-E) with reference to the orders of approval by the department, and after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order. With these observations the writ petition stands disposed of.” 5. As can be seen from the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the claim of the petitioner for appointment towards the second sanctioned post of a lecturer in Geography has been - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 upheld by this Court, which has remitted the matter back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration in the light of the recommendation dated 18.09.1991 and with reference to the order of approval by the department. 6. Despite the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the categorical finding recorded by this Court in W.P.No.1965/2002 (supra), the 1st respondent proceeds to once again reject the claim petitioner by passing the impugned order which is assailed in the present petition. 7. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that, despite having noticed the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.1965/2002 dated 20.12.2006 and the earlier order / corrigendum dated 18.06.1988 sanctioning two posts as well as the approval dated 18.09.1991 issued by the 5th respondent, the 1st respondent proceeds to pass the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the sole ground that the aforesaid order dated 18.06.1988 is invalid and the claim of the petitioner cannot be accepted on the basis of an invalid order; in my considered opinion, the 1st respondent has failed to consider and appreciate that the aforesaid corrigendum / order dated - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 18.06.1988 as well as the appointment order / recommendation dated 18.09.1991 appointing the petitioner to the post of a lecturer in Geography had attained finality coupled with the fact that this Court in the earlier round of litigation in W.P.No.1965/2002 had categorically upheld the claim of the petitioner by making the aforesaid observations and the matter was remitted back to the 1st respondent for the limited / restricted purpose of considering the claim of the petitioner with reference to the findings and observations recorded in the order by this Court and the other material on record. Under these circumstances, the 1st respondent was clearly not justified and he fell in error in rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the order dated 18.06.1988 was illegal and invalid; in this context, it is pertinent to note that the said order dated 18.06.1988 had not been recalled/reviewed/modified and the petitioner having been appointed subsequently on 18.09.1991 and his appointment having been upheld by this Court in the earlier round of litigation, so long as the earlier order dated 18.06.1988 was not recalled, it was impermissible in law for the 1st respondent to reject the claim of the petitioner nor respondent No.1 is entitled to go behind/beyond the aforesaid - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11841 WP No. 106711 of 2014 order dated 18.06.1988, which clearly sanctioned two posts, out of which, the petitioner has been appointed towards one post. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order at Annexure-N dated 14.11.2013 deserves to be set aside and necessary directions be issued to the respondents within a stipulated time frame. 8. In the result, the following : ORDER 1. Petition is hereby allowed. 2. Impugned order and at Annexure-N dated 14.11.2013 is hereby set aside. 3. The concerned respondent Nos.1 to 5 are directed to fix and pay the salary to the petitioner with effect from 24.06.1991 to 23.10.96 under the Grant-in-Aid Code and count the services of the petitioner as a lecturer for the purpose of seniority, increments and all other consequential benefits etc. and pass appropriate orders in this regard within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE EM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29