A university professor filed a writ petition apprehending suspension action arising from an MLA's letter recommending her suspension to the Registrar. The University stated it had no intention to act on that letter, so the court found the petitioner's apprehension misconceived and disposed of the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.4439 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
PROF.GEETHA C AGED 57 YEARS WIFE OF A.T.GOVINDARAJ WORKING AS: PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY JNANA SAHYADRI SHANKARAGHATTA SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 451
Digitally signed by ALBHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
RESIDING AT: NO.L/4, FACULTY QUARTERS KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY JNANA SAHYADRI SHANKARAGHATTA SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 451
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PALLAVA R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560001
AT PRESENT: THE MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (MLA) FOR THE BHADRAVATHI CONSTITUENCY STATE OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.B.SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R.1; SRI.RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S.V.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 TO R.5; NOTICE TO R.6 IS DEFERRED V/O/D 19.02.2024)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER NO.NIL DATED 10.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-6 HEREIN TO THE REGISTRAR – THE R.4 HEREIN RECOMMENDING SUSPENSION OF THE PETITIONER FROM HER SERVICE WHICH IS GIVEN HEREIN AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed by the
petitioner apprehending that respondent No.4 – Registrar of respondent No.2 – University is likely to initiate action
based on the letter communicated by respondent No.6 as per Annexure-A.
No.2, on instructions, submits that respondent No.2 has no intention to initiate any action in terms of the impugned letter at Annexure-A. This statement is taken on record.
contemplating to initiate action based on the letter as per Annexure-A, the apprehension of the petitioner is found to be misconceived.
With these above observations, the writ petition stands disposed off.
Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off.
Sd/JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10
1 issue framed by the court
Would the University initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner based on respondent No.6's suspension recommendation letter?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prof. Geetha C
The State of Karnataka, Department of Higher Education (Universities)
The Kuvempu University represented by its Registrar
The Vice Chancellor, Kuvempu University
The Registrar, Kuvempu University
The Syndicate of Kuvempu University represented by the Registrar
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
