Petitioner challenged rejection of his candidature for Assistant Professor appointment due to alleged non-recognition of his degree. Court observed significant delay of ten years between the 2015 selection notification and the 2024 petition, holding that the delay defeated his right.
The petition is rejected on the ground of delay.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:27052 WP No. 9213 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9213 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. KRISHNA S/O. SRI. MUTTHA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT MOODUHADU VILLAGE, YEDABETTU SASTHANA POST, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIKANTH N V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRINCE ISAC, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 27/05/2022, 28/12/2022 AND 16/02/2024
NC: 2024:KHC:27052 WP No. 9213 of 2024
GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-A, A1 AND A2.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has participated in the selection process for the appointment of Assistant Professors with the Government First Grade Colleges in the State consequent to the Selection Notification issued on 12.02.2015. The petitioner contends that he should have been one of the selected candidates because even according to the respondent, a person who has appropriate educational qualification in Information Technology could teach Undergraduates in Computer Science and Computer Applications. The petitioner further contends that though he has filed different representations with the respondent for consideration of his selection and issuance of appointment orders, the respondent has failed to consider these representations. The petitioner has enclosed representations filed from the year 2022.
NC: 2024:KHC:27052 WP No. 9213 of 2024
learned Additional Government Advocate was called upon to secure instructions and the learned Additional Government Advocate, places on record the assessment by the concerned Scrutiny Committee and a later Communication dated 31.08.2023 addressed by the Chief Administrative Officer, Collegiate Education to the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education [Higher Education].
NC: 2024:KHC:27052 WP No. 9213 of 2024
selection process, and the Government's approval for the selection is awaited.
the petitioner, responding to this turn of events submits that the petitioner's candidature could not have been cancelled because the petitioner has enrolled with the Karnataka State Open University in the year 2011 and the degree certificate obtained by those after 2012-13 is not recognized and this is reiterated by this Court in W.P.No.34255/2016 [GMRES]1 while directing the Karnataka Public Service Commission to consider the candidature of those who have obtained requisite degree from this University for the academic year prior to 2012-13.
1 Disposed of on 27.06.2016
NC: 2024:KHC:27052 WP No. 9213 of 2024
The selection notification is issued in the year 2015 and further recruitment process is also commenced, but he has filed this petition only in the year 2024. Hence, the petition stands rejected.
Sd/JUDGE
RB
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, who filed this petition ten years after the selection process, is entitled to a hearing regarding non-recognition of his degree.
Whether the delay of ten years in approaching this court defeats the petitioner's right to seek consideration of his candidature.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the respondent's decision to reject the petitioner's candidature due to delay.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.No.34255/2016 [GMRES]Referred¶32
SRI. KRISHNA S/O. SRI. MUTTHA
THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
B M SHYAM PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
