Allowed

Savitha N Venkataramana v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Jun 2023WP/2527/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court set aside an endorsement ordering a 100 percent reserved post as ineligible for reservation under the law. It directed the institution to forward the appointment papers for approval and the authorities to consider a fresh proposal within two months.

What did the court decide?

The endorsement dated 31.05.2019 was set aside. The institution is directed to forward papers for approval; if no proposal sent within two months, authorities must consider it and pass appropriate ord

Savitha N Venkataramana Vs the State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 2527 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.2527 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SAVITHA N. VENKATARAMANA W/O SRI SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING KANNADA TEACHER, AT VIJAYA EDUCATION SOCIETY (R), GRAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE ROAD, HINAKAL, MYSURU - 570030.

¶9

RESIDING AT NO.5707, VIJAYANAGAR 4^TH STAGE 2^ND PHASE, MYSURU-570 030.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. M.S.PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION M. S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS NEW PUBLIC OFFICES, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,

¶16

¶17

WP No. 2527 of 2023

¶18

K R CIRCLE BENGALURU -560001.

¶19

1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS SECONDARY EDUCATION NEW PUBLIC OFFICES NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, K. R. CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560001.

¶20

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU -570005.

¶21

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU - 570001.

¶22

VIJAYA EDUCATION SOCIETY (R) GRAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE ROAD HINAKAL MYSURU – 570030.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

( BY SRI M.S.NAGARAJA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-5; SRI N.S.BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT/ORDER BEARING NO.C8(5)SHA SHI AA/HU NE ANU 25/2019-20 DATED 31.05.2019 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-X AND ETC.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

¶27

IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

¶29

WP No. 2527 of 2023

¶30

ORDER

¶31

In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the endorsement dated 31.05.2019 (Annexure-X) passed by respondent No.3 and further, seeking direction to the 6th respondent - Management to re-submit the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioner to the post of Kannada Teacher to Grant-in-Aid from the date of appointment i.e. 24.07.2016, vide Annexure-K with all service benefits.

¶32

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶33

Sri. M.P. Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the post to be filled up by the sixth respondent - Management in respect of Assistant Teacher in Kannada is a single post and same cannot be reserved as the same amounts to 100 percent reservation, accordingly, he sought for interference by this Court.

¶34

Learned Additional Government Advocate argued that the post to be filled up is a backlog post and therefore he would oppose the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶35

¶36

WP No. 2527 of 2023

¶37

Sri. N.S. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 - Institution supports the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate.

¶38

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful examination of the writ papers would indicate that the post of Assistant Teacher in Kannada in respondent No.6 - Institution is a single post and in that view of the matter, taking into consideration the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.R. INAMDAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in (2020) 19 SCC 543, I am of the view that the said post ought not to have been reserved by the respondent - authorities as the same amounts to 100 percent reservation and as such, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the endorsement dated 31.05.2019 (Annexure - X) passed by the respondent is set aside.

¶39

It is submitted by Sri. N.S. Bhat that the petitioner herein has been appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher in Kannada by the respondents and it is for the sixth respondent -

¶40

¶41

WP No. 2527 of 2023

¶42

Institution to forward the papers of the petitioner for approval to the respondent - authorities.

¶43

In the event, if such an exercise has already been made by the respondent No.6 - Institution, the respondent - authorities are directed to consider the same in accordance with law. If not, in the event a proposal for approval is sent by the Institution within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, same shall be considered and appropriate orders passed by the respondent – authorities, within two months thereafter.

¶44

SD/JUDGE

¶45

sac*

Savitha N Venkataramana v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savitha N Venkataramana 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ramanjinappa B N Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mahantheshappa M Vs the General Manager

Food Corporation of India Vs Union of India

The Manager Vs the Member Secretary

Sri Siddaiah Vs the State by Commissioner for

K. Kalaiah Vs the Secretary