- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 101002 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. RUPALI D/O. PARASHURAM SARAVANKAR, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: SCIENCE ASST. TEACHER, AT. P.V.S. MANDAL NEW ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL, BIJAGARNI, BELAGAVI – 591 108, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRUTHVI K. S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, RPTD BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, DEPT. OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S.S BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS TRAING COLLEGE ROAD, DHARWAD -580 001, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 3. THE BLOCK EDUCAION OFFICER BELAGAVI TALUKA RANGE (RURAL), BELAGAVI-590002, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPT. OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BELAGAVI (SOUTH) – 590 002, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR RESPONDENTS) Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RECORD APPROVAL TO THE RECOMMENDATION FORWARDED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-J DATED 5/7/2018 BRG NO.S-3.KHAPROUSHA.NEAA.BIJAGARNI.8.2009-10/287 AND THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 VIDE ANNEXURE-K DATED 20/8/2018 BRG NO.G.2/KHAPROUSHA/NEAA/08/2010-11/1319 AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER OF APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF SCIENCE (CBZ) TEACHER OF THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/11/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-L, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE APPOINTMENT OF TO THE POST OF SCIENCE (CBZ) TEACHER OF THE PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DATED 3/3/2016 PASSED IN W.P.NO.107368/2014 C/W W.P.NO.112623/2014 AND W.P.NO.101276-101353/2015 (EDN- RES) PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND THE APPROVAL ORDER DTD. 30/6/2016 BRG.G5/ SHASHIAA/ KHAHHUTU/ VIBHA/73/2012-13 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, 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: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer. “A) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus by directing the Respondent No.1 to record approval to the Recommendation forwarded by the Respondent No.3 to Respondent No.4 vide ANNEXURE-J dtd: 5/7/2018 brg No.S-3: KhaProuSha : NeAa : Bijagarni : 8:2009-10 / 287 and the Respondent No.2 to 4 vide ANNEXURE-K dtd: 20/8/2018 brg No.G.2 / KhaProusha / NeAa / 08 / 2010-11 / 1319 and to pass appropriate order of Approval of Appointment to the Post of Science (CBZ) Teacher of the Petitioner by considering the Representation dtd: 26/11/2024 vide ANNXURE-L, in the interest of justice and equity. B) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus by directing the Respondents to consider the approval of the appointment of to the Post of Science (CBZ) teacher of the petitioner as per the Order dated 3/3/2016 passed in W.P.No.107368/2014 C/w W.P.No.112623/2014 & W.P.No.101276- 101353/2015 (EDN-RES) passed by this Hon’ble court vide ANNEXURE-G and the Approval Order dtd: 30/6/2016 brg.G5/ShaShiAa/KhaHHuTu/ ViBha/73/2012-13 vide ANNEXURE-H, in the interest of justice and equity. C) Issue such other suitable order/s or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the prayer of the petitioner is identical to what was sought by several identically placed teachers in W.P. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 No.107368/2014 c/w W.P. No.112623/2014 and W.P. Nos.101276-101353/2015 and in W.P. No.63261/2011 c/w W.P. No.63266/2012. 3. The learned HCGP though would vehemently refute the submission of the counsel for the petitioner, to buttress her submission that the issue does not stand covered. Therefore I deem it appropriate to notice the orders of this Court in the aforementioned writ petitions. 4. The Division Bench of this Court while disposing of, the writ petitions in W.P. No.63261/2011 c/w W.P. No.63266/2012 on 29-11-2013 passed the following order: “6. In the circumstances, we pass the following order: i) the writ petitions, in view of the order dated 25.10.2013 passed in W.P.No.9744/2012 do not survive and disposed of as such, ii) appointments made by the petitioners/institutions in pursuance of the order dated 01.06.2012 would be subject to outcome of the writ appeal, if any, filed by the respondent-State against the order dated 25.10.2013 in W.P.No.9744/2012, iii) it is needless to mention that the petitioners shall be entitled to enjoy all benefits of the interim order dated 01.06.2012 on the basis of which they seem to have made appointments, only if, the appointments were made after following the due procedure and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 subject to approval of the appointments by the Education Department, iv) if for any reason the department does not grant approval, it is open for the petitioners to challenge the said orders in appropriate proceedings. v) we hope and trust that, if the Department has not passed orders on the applications made by the petitioners seeking approval of the appointments made, they shall do so as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from today. It is made clear that the proposals seeking approval shall not be rejected on the basis of the direction to follow the roster system, as prescribed by the impugned notification, subject to outcome of the appeal, if any, filed by the State, as aforementioned, or interim order, passed thereon.” (Emphasis supplied) 5. Relying on the aforequoted order the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court allowed the writ petitions in W.P. No.107368/2014 c/w W.P. No.112623/2014 and W.P. Nos.101276-101353/2015. The order of the Co-ordinate Bench dated 03-03-2016, reads as follows: “4. A notification dated 03.09.2010 was issued by the State Government prescribing roster system mandating policy of reservation to be followed in the institutions having status of linguistic minority in the matter of appointment of teachers. This was challenged by the petitioner in W.P. No.63261/2011. An interim order was passed on 15.07.2011 staying the said notification. Thereafter, petitioner made several representations seeking permission to fill up vacancies of teachers admitted to grant-in-aid which became vacant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 on account of transfer, death and/or retirement etc. of the incumbents. These representations are produced at Annexures-C to E. Some correspondence have taken place between the institution and the authorities regarding the actual number of vacancies. The institution has responded furnishing the details. In the meanwhile, it appears there was some internal problem with the management of the institution, and an Administrator was appointed. It is in this background an application has been filed by a rival management which claims that it was entitled to manage the affairs of the institutions through the registered society by name Vishwa Bharat Seva Samiti. The said question does not fall for consideration in this case. 5. The question that arises for consideration is with regard to approval of the appointment of teachers. Petitioner has made appointments to fill up the posts pursuant to the interim order granted in W.P. No.63261/2011 C/w W.P. No.63266/2012 and other connected matters dated 01.06.2012 produced at Annexure-Q. In the said order, this Court has observed that it was open for the petitioner-institution to fill the vacancies of teaching and non-teaching staff by following due procedure subject to certain conditions. The Court also made it clear that insofar as non-teaching staff was concerned, filling up of the posts would be subject to economic measures. Further, clarification was made stating that if the petitioner-institution failed in the writ petitions, the Government shall not have any responsibility of such employees appointed pursuant to the said order, but regardless of the failure of the petitioners in the writ petitions, Government shall pay the salary for the period from the date of appointment till final disposal of the writ petitions. 6. Pursuant to this interim order, petitioner has filled up vacant posts by calling for applications and following the procedure prescribed. The writ petitions, which had been referred to the Division Bench, came to be allowed, setting aside the notification issued by the Government prescribing reservation, vide order dated 29.11.2013. Thereafter, petitioner has corresponded with the authorities to accord approval to the appointments made to the teaching staff. In response, the impugned endorsement at Annexure-AA has been issued by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 Commissioner. The Commissioner states that the interim order passed by the Court required the petitioner to make appointment by following due procedure, but petitioner- institution had made appointments without taking prior approval of the authorities and therefore, as per Rules it was for the management to pay salary of those teachers. In other words, approval sought for has been rejected on the ground that rules had not been followed and the direction issued in the interim order was not complied with. 7. Insofar as the direction issued in the interim order passed by this Court is concerned, there is no requirement that prior approval of the State Government had to be obtained before making the appointments. No doubt, it is stated that appointments to be made by the institution have to be approved by the Government. Insofar as the alleged requirement in the rules to take prior approval of the State or its authority, the Commissioner neither makes any reference to the said rule nor makes any reference to the representations repeatedly given by the petitioner seeking such approval. He does not say why approval repeatedly sought for by the petitioner-institution was not granted. Therefore, the impugned endorsement is a cryptic one being the result of non-application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. The interim order passed by this Court only says that appointment has to be done by following due process. This is sought to be interpreted by the authorities to mean that appointment had to be made only by taking prior approval. At this stage, it is not necessary for this Court to go into this larger question. Suffice to observe that order under challenge is not a speaking order. It does not refer to all the relevant materials which were on record before the authorities in the form of representations submitted by the petitioner and the correspondence made by the authorities right from the level of Block Education Officer upto the Commissioner of Public Instructions. 9. For the above reasons, I am of the view that the impugned endorsements are liable to be quashed. The Commissioner for Public Instructions has to reconsider the matter keeping in mind the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 interim direction issued by this Court in W.P. No.63261/2011 and also the final passed order in the said writ petition, as also the various correspondence made by the petitioner with the competent authorities. The recommendation made by the Officers subordinate to the Commissioner have to be also taken into consideration. 10. Insofar as the application filed by the impleading applicant to come on record as an additional respondent, I am of the view that as this Court is not deciding the internal dispute regarding management of the institution, it is unnecessary to allow the said application. Hence, the said application is rejected. 11. In the result, both the writ petitions are allowed. Impugned endorsements are set aside directing the Commissioner for Public Instructions to reconsider the matter keeping in mind the interim direction issued by this Court in W.P. No.63261/2011 and the final order in the said writ petition. Various correspondences made by the petitioner with the competent authority and the recommendation made by the Officers subordinate to the Commissioner shall also be considered. Necessary order shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” (Emphasis supplied) 6. A perusal at the aforequoted orders, would clearly indicate that the issue in the lis is identical to what is decided by the Division Bench and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforementioned writ petitions. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief that is granted to those Assistant Teachers in the cases quoted herein above. In that light, the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13883 WP No. 101002 of 2025 petition deserves to succeed with the prayers being answered in his favour. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) The Commissioner for Public Instructions to reconsider the matter bearing in mind the interim direction issued by the Division Bench in W.P. No.63261/2011 c/w W.P. No.63266/2012 and the final order in the said writ petition within three months. Necessary order shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RSH/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71