Dismissed

Smt Nalini Shivashankar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Oct 2012WP/35804/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a teacher appointed in an aided college, sought a direction to the State and Department of Pre-University Education to consider her representations regarding her post not being admitted to the grant. The High Court found no ground to interfere with the Government's decision to deny admission of the post and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; liberty granted to challenge the Government's decision regarding non-admission of the post.

Smt Nalini Shivashankar Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

WP No.35804/2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2012

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBHASH B ADI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.35804 OF 2011 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT NALINI SHIVASHANKAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O SRI S SHIVASHANKAR, LECTUREER IN ENGLISH, BHARTIYA SAMSKRITHI VIDYA PETHA PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, VIJAYANAGAR BRANCH, BANGALORE-560040 … PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.K.C.SHANTHA KUMAR, ADV. FOR SMT.B S VIJAYALAKSHMI, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (PRIMARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION) M.S.BUILDINGS, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001

¶13

THE DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE 560003 REP BY ITS COMMISIONER

¶14

BHARATIYA SAMSKRITHI VIDYA PEETHA NO.29, 1ST MAIN ROAD,

¶15

WP No.35804/2011

¶16

¶17

CHAMARAJAPET, BANALORE-560018 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

(SRI.RAGHAVENDRA G.GAYATRI, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2 SRI.R RAMACHANDRA NAIK, ADV. FOR R3)

¶20

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 directing the R1 & 2 to consider the requests and representations submitted by R3 vide Ann-A dated 24.6.07, vide Ann-C dated 24.8.09, vide Ann-D dated 19.5.10, vide Ann-F dated 15.6.11 objectively and expeditiously and etc.

¶21

This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:-

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

None appears for the respondent No.3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶24

The petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the representations submitted to respondent No.3 as per Annexures-A, C, D and F dated 24.6.2007, 24.8.2009, 19.5.2010 and 15.6.2011, respectively.

¶25

¶26

WP No.35804/2011

¶27

The petitioner claims that she is a teacher working in the respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 is stated to be an aided College. The petitioner has been appointed to the post of English teacher. However, her post is not approved by the Government and admitted to the grant. As such, the petitioner has made representations to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the said representations are not yet considered.

¶28

The Government has filed statement of objections and in paragraph 5 of the objections, it is stated that, in respect of 3^rd respondent – College, only five subjects viz., English, History, Sociology, Political Science and Commerce were identified for being admitted to the grant. The post of the petitioner is not admitted to the grant and accordingly, has negatived granting of aid to the post to which the petitioner is appointed and the said decision has also been intimated to the 3^rd respondent.

¶29

If the Government has already taken a decision in not admitting the post of the petitioner to the grant, I find no ground to interfere with the same. However, liberty is

¶30

WP No.35804/2011

¶31

¶32

reserved to the petitioner to challenge the said decision of the Government before the appropriate forum.

¶33

Accordingly, petition is disposed of.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Smt Nalini Shivashankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Nalini Shivashankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Mohan B Badagandi Vs the Secretary Civil Judge Recruitment Committee

Sri M Vinaya S/O H R Manjunath Vs the Beml Ltd.

Sri Mohana B L Vs the State of Karnataka

S Narasimha Murthy Vs Indian Overseas Bank

Sri a T Chandru Vs the Superintending Engineer

Sri M P Lakshminarayana Vs the State of Karnataka