- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 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.105205 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. SIDDALINGESHWAR S/O. SHYAGEPPA ATHANI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, SHRI. RAMAKRISHNA PERMAHANSA ARTS AND SCIENCE PU COLLEGE, SALHALLI, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELGAUM-591123. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, 18TH CROSS, SAMPAGI ROAD, MALLESWARUM, BANGALORE-560012. 3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BELGAUM DIVISION, BELGAUM-590002. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT-587101. 5. SRI. B.V.V.SANGHA BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT-587101, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN/WORKING PRESIDENT. 6. THE PRINCIPAL STATE PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLAGE, RAMDURG, DIST: BELGAUM-591123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. H.M.DHARIGOND, ADVCOATE FOR R5; NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.02.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER NO.P.PU.C.E/C/-3/EB/HUBHA/401/279/ 2011-12 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECT THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO APPROVE THE POST OF THE PETITIONER AS PER SELECTION MADE BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT & ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 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 to quash the impugned order dated 4-2-2014 issued by the second respondent under No. P.PU.C.E/C/-3/EB/HUBHA/401/279/2011-12 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q B] A writ in the nature of mandamus direct the second respondent to approve the post of the petitioner as per selection made by the 5th respondent. C). Grant such other relief's as are deemed fit and necessary under the Circumstances of the case including the cost of this writ petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner was appointed on 13.07.2005 as a lecturer in Political Science with respondent Nos.5 and 6. Subsequently on 08.02.2011, the 2nd respondent - Director of the Pre-University Education, issued a notification and granted permission to the 5th respondent – Institution to appoint persons to the post of lecturers in Political Science by way of direct recruitment. In pursuance of the said direction, the 5th respondent issued a notification dated 08.03.2011 calling for eligible candidates for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 the post of lecturers in Political Science. Accordingly, the petitioner being an in service candidate also applied for the said post. But since he was not given an interview card / letter, he approached this Court in W.P.No.62997/2011 before this Court, which passed an interim order dated 27.05.2011 permitting the petitioner to appear in the interview and by making it subject to the final outcome of this petition. The said interim order dated 27.05.2011 passed by this Court reads as under: “ORDER Sri Jagadish Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner files a compliance memo to the effect that the hand summons on the respondent No.6 are served. He submits that the petitioner has applied for the post in question (lecturer in Political Science) at the institution being run by the respondent No.6 Society. He submits that the petitioner has been serving as a from lecturer with the respondent No.6 institution 13.7.2005. He further submits that as per the directions contained in the Government letter, dated 7.2.2009 (Annexure-C) to the Public Instructions Department, the petitioner is entitled to 2% service weightage besides the age relaxation. He has expressed the apprehension that the petitioner may not even get the interview card, unless the service weightage and age relaxation are given. He further submits that the interview for filing up of the post in question is commencing on 30.5.2011. If the interview takes place and thereafter the recruitment process is completed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to take interview, interest may suffer irretrievably. If the selection process is over, the third party interest may also come in. However, it may not be desirable to stay the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 entire recruitment process. I therefore deem it just to grant the interim order permitting the petitioner to appear for the ensuing interview. The respondents are directed to issue interview card to the petitioner forthwith and permit him to appear for the ensuing interview. It is made clear that the act of the petitioner appearing for the ensuing interview by virtue of this interim order is subject to the outcome of this writ petition. Should this writ petition be dismissed, the petitioner shall not plead equity. 4. Subsequently, the Petitioner was selected and appointed to the said post by giving him additional 2 grace marks, since he was already an in service candidate and accordingly a resolution dated 11.06.2011 was passed by the 5th respondent, who forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent for approval. 5. In view of the aforesaid resolution and in view of the fact that the petitioner had successfully completed the interview and had been selected to the said post as an in service candidate, this Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petition in W.P.No.62997/2011, placing on record the submission made by the respondents that the petitioner had already been selected for the post of lecturer in Political Science and that his name had been forwarded to the Government for approval. The said final - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 order dated 18.06.2012 passed by this Court in W.P.No.62997/2011 reads as under: “ORDER Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has been selected for the post of lecturer in Political Science and that his name has been forwarded to the government for approval and therefore nothing further survives for consideration in this petition. Recording the submission, petition is accordingly disposed of”. 6. However subsequently, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned memorandum / endorsement at Annexure-Q dated 04.02.2014 rejecting the case of the petitioner for approval and directed the 5th respondent to issue fresh notification within a period of 2 months. However, the said direction issued by the 2nd respondent to the 5th respondent to issue a fresh notification has been stayed by this Court in the present petition, vide order dated 13.02.2015. 7. Aggrieved by the impugned memorandum / endorsement dated 04.02.2014 declining to grant approval to the resolution passed by the 5th respondent in favour of the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 petitioner, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 8. A perusal of the impugned memorandum / endorsement issued by the 2nd respondent declining to approve the resolution passed by the 5th respondent appointing the petitioner to the post of a lecturer in Political Science is not only contrary to the specific undertaking / concession given / made by all the respondents including the 2nd respondent before this Court in W.P.No.62997/2011, but the 2nd respondent clearly fell in error in declining to grant approval on the ground that the petitioner had not obtained the requisite marks; in this context, the 2nd respondent failed to consider and appreciate that the petitioner being an in-service candidate was entitled to 2 grace marks, which permitted him and made him eligible to be selected to the post of a lecturer. In addition thereto, the 2nd respondent erred in attempting to go behind / beyond not only the resolution of the 5th respondent but also the concessions/submission made before this Court in the final order of this Court, wherein, all the respondents including the 2nd respondent have categorically - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 admitted that, the petitioner had been selected to the said post after completing his interview. 9. It is also pertinent to note that no other candidate had challenged the selection of the petitioner to the post of lecturer and the said resolution passed by the 5th respondent, appointing the petitioner to the post of lecturer and as admitted before this Court in W.P.No.62997/2011, had attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon all respondents including the 2nd respondent. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned memorandum / endorsement at Annexure-Q dated 04.02.2014 deserves to be set aside and necessary directions be issued to 2nd respondent to grant approval to the resolution passed by 5th respondent selecting / appointing the petitioner to the post of a lecturer in Political Science subject within a stipulated time frame. 10. In the result, the following: ORDER 1. Petition is hereby allowed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11810 WP No. 105205 of 2014 2. The impugned memorandum / endorsement at Annexure-Q dated 04.02.2014 is hereby set aside. 3. The 2nd respondent is directed to approve the resolution of the 5th respondent appointing / selecting the petitioner to the post of the lecturer of Political Science subject and grant all consequential benefits flowing therefrom as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE EM, CT:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25