Allowed

Dr Vanaja D W/O Dr. Vinayka Prasanna K v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Dec 2023WP/103490/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking appointment to the post of Professor. The court directed implementation of a 2019 promotion decision, quashing a committee finding that allegedly lacked a sealed cover decision, and directed appointment with consequential benefits.

What did the court decide?

Appointment to the post of Professor directed; order quashed; exercise to complete within three months of receipt.

Dr Vanaja D W/O Dr. Vinayka Prasanna K Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 103490 OF 2023 (S-PRO)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

DR. VANAJA D. W/O DR. VINAYKA PRASANNA K, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF OBG, VIMS, BALLARI, R/AT. NO.18, SHIVAGIRI NAGAR, SIRGUPPA ROAD, HAVAMBHAVI, BALLARI-583103.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (MEDICAL EDUCATION), M. S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR, VIJAYANAGARA INSTITUE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE CONTONMENT, BALLARI-583104.

¶15

Digitally signed MOHANKUMARB SHELAR byMOHANKUMARB SHELARDate: 2023.12.20 16:18:17 +0530

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR REPONDENT NO.1, SRI. J. M. ANILKUMAR, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE LETTER DATED 16.09.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-J WRITTEN BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RESPONDENT NO.2 AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03.06.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND REPRESENTATION DATED 03.10.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-L.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶23

HCGP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2-institution.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction

¶25

submits that he does not press the prayer at Annexure-J. Accordingly, the said prayer is not considered.

¶26

The second prayer is to issue writ of mandamus directing respondents No.1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 03.06.2022 marked at Annexure-G and representation dated 03.10.2022 vide Annexure-L. The aforementioned representations are submitted by the petitioner to consider the petitioner’s claim for promotion by opening sealed cover. It is urged that the decision relating to the petitioner’s promotion is kept in a sealed cover in view of the pendency of a departmental enquiry. The enquiry had commenced when the petitioner was working as Assistant Professor under respondent No.2. The enquiry was concluded in the year 2018. Pursuant to

¶27

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶28

interim direction issued by this court, the decision of the committee relating to the petitioner’s promotion was opened and placed before the departmental promotion committee on 18.11.2023. After opening the sealed cover decision taken earlier, the committee has further reviewed the decision taken on 24.06.2019. In terms of the earlier decision, the committee had taken a decision to promote the petitioner from the post of Assistant Professor to the post of Associate Professor and also Professor. In other words, the committee is of the view that petitioner is eligible to be promoted as Professor.

¶29

In the said decision taken on 18.11.2023, the departmental promotion committee has taken a view that under the sealed cover the decision pertaining to the petitioner’s promotion is not available. However, the document at Annexure-F would reveal that the decision was taken on 24.06.2019 to the effect that the petitioner is to be promoted to the post of Professor.

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶31

Though the learned counsel for the respondents

¶32

would submit that petitioner is not eligible for promotion, it is to be noticed that the Committee has rejected the claim on the premise that there is no order promoting the petitioner. Said contention cannot be accepted. The decision is taken on 24.06.2019 itself to promote the petitioner. However, in the endorsement dated 20.11.2023 which is issued pursuant to a direction issued by this Court, it is observed that there is no decision kept in the sealed cover. It is also relevant to note that the decision is taken to keep the decision on promotion in sealed cover

¶33

as the departmental enquiry was pending against the petitioner. There is no dispute that petitioner is exonerated of the charges in the departmental enquiry. There is no dispute that the petitioner possesses the necessary qualification.

¶34

This being the position and also considering the fact that petitioner did possess all the qualifications to be

¶35

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶36

appointed to the post of Professor, the writ petition has to be allowed.

¶37

Though, the decision taken on 18.11.2023 to

¶38

consider the petitioner’s promotion in the upcoming meeting of the Committee, is not questioned, this court is of the view that decision which is already taken to promote the petitioner on 24.06.2019 has to be given effect to. Accordingly, decision taken on 18.11.2023 and endorsement dated 20.11.2023 are quashed.

¶39

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Respondents No.1 and 2 are directed appoint the petitioner to the post of Professor in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Petitioner is entitled to all the consequential benefits.

¶40

This exercise shall be completed within three

¶41

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, petitioner is entitled to interest at the rate of

¶42

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14736 WP No. 103490 of 2023

¶43

6% p.a. from the date of this order till payment, on

¶44

arrears of service benefits payable to the petitioner.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

MBS/ct-an List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Dr Vanaja D W/O Dr. Vinayka Prasanna K v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Vanaja D W/O Dr. Vinayka Prasanna K 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Shankrappa Virupaxappa Dandin Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.H.Girish Nayak S/O Hanumanayak Vs the State of Karnataka

Nazukma W/O Khasimsab Multani Vs the Tahashildar

Shri.Ashok Bhimappa Naik Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr Vinayaka Prasanna K Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Sabanna Galeppa Pujeri Vs State of Karnataka