Dismissed¶42

Sri.Arun S/O. Bhagavan Patil v. He Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Dec 2025WP/106002/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seniority from common appointment order vs date of joining; promotion to Headmaster; Assistant Master feeder cadre; age-based inter se seniority in common recruitment; Karnataka Department of Primary and Higher Education; Revision Petition (Appeal) No.101/2018; Annexure-L; Annexure-D1; writ petition rejected.

What did the court decide?

Seniority for promotion to Headmaster is based upon the feeder cadre and the date of entry into service under the appointment order; it is a mistaken notion that seniority would be counted from the date on which the appointee steps into the office. ¶37

Sri.Arun S/O. Bhagavan Patil Vs He Government of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether seniority between the petitioner and respondent No.6, both appointed under a common appointment order dated 22.07.2006, is to be reckoned from the date of the appointment order (with age as the determinant absent a merit criterion) rather than from the date of physically reporting to duty, for purposes of promotion to the post of Headmaster.

¶37

Court's answer

¶37

Ratio / Principle

Both the petitioner and respondent No.6 joined pursuant to the same appointment order and both joined within the permitted time, so neither can claim seniority advantage from the date of reporting to duties.

¶41

Key takeaways

Where recruitment is common and appointment orders are issued on the same date, inter se seniority would rest on merit if merit is the criterion, failing which on age; whoever is senior in age will be the senior.ratio¶42
No fault can be found with the action of the State in placing respondent No.6, who is senior in age, as Headmaster over and above the claim of the petitioner; the petition lacking in merit stands rejected.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by an Assistant Master seeking to quash (i) the order dated 28.01.2019 of the Appellate Authority (Government of Karnataka, Department of Primary and Higher Education) in Revision Petition (Appeal) No.101/2018 (Annexure-L) and (ii) the promotion of respondent No.6 as Head Master of respondent No.3 school by order dated 31.08.2016 (Annexure-D1). Petitioner and respondent No.6 were selected together and hold a common appointment order dated 22.07.2006; the petitioner reported on 24.07.2006 and respondent No.6 on 25.07.2006, both within the permitted time. Held: seniority is based upon the feeder cadre and the date of entry into service under the appointment order, not the date of physically stepping into the office; in a common recruitment with appointment orders issued on the same day, inter se seniority rests on merit or, absent a merit criterion, on age. Respondent No.6, being senior in age, was rightly placed senior and promoted as Headmaster; the petition lacking in merit stands rejected.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:18018 WP No. 106002 of 2019

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 106002 OF 2019 (S-PRO)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI ARUN S/O. BHAGAVAN PATIL AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT MASTER, GURUDEV RANADE MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, CHANDUR, TAL: CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI SRINAND A. PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND ASSISTANT SECRETARY, THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT PRIMARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU.

¶13

Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

¶14

SRI CHANDESHWAR EDUCATION SOCIETY REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CHANDUR, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

THE GURUDEV RANADE MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL CHANDUR, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, CHANDUR, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶17

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER (SOUTH DIVISION) CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC-D:18018 WP No. 106002 of 2019

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

SRI SADASHIV S/O. ANNAPPA BANDAGAR AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT MASTER, GURUDEV RANADE MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, CHANDUR, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1, R4 AND R5; SMT. VIDYAVATHI M. KOTTURSHETTAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI B. SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R6)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.01.2019 PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT IN REVISION PETITION (APPEAL) NO.101/2018 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-L. QUASH THE ORDER OF PROMOTION OF RESPONDENT NO.6 AS HEAD MASTER OF RESPONDENT NO.3 SCHOOL DATED 31.08.2016 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-D1.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶28

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the

¶29

following prayer:

¶30

i. To quash the order dated 28.01.2019 passed by the 1^st respondent in Revision Petition (Appeal) No.101/2018 marked at Annexure-L;

¶31

ii. To quash the order of promotion of respondent No.6 as head master of respondent No.3 school dated 31.08.2016 passed by the respondent No.2 marked at Annexure-D1.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶33

petitioner and the learned counsels for the respondents.

¶34

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:18018 WP No. 106002 of 2019

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

The petitioner and the respondent No.6 enter the service of the Government in the Department of Human Resources on 22.07.2006 pursuant to a selection process and the appointment orders being issued on the same date i.e., on 22.07.2006. Then comes the claim for promotion to the post of Headmaster. The promotion to the post of Headmaster is ostensibly on the basis of seniority. The seniority is based upon the feeder cadre. The feeder cadre is the Assistant Master. In the feeder cadre, the seniority assumes significance for the purpose of calculating date of entry into service. The appointment order depicts that the person should report to duties within 10 days from the date of said appointment. The petitioner was eager to join immediately, entered the office on 24.07.2006 on the basis of the appointment order dated 22.07.2006. The 6^th respondent took it easy and entered the office on the 6^th day i.e., on 25.07.2006, albeit on the same even date appointment order.

¶37

The petitioner is before the Court on a mistaken notion that seniority would be counted on the date on which they step into the office and not the appointment order. If both the petitioner and the respondent No.6 being beneficiaries of a common appointment order, if the respondent No.6 had reported

¶38

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC-D:18018 WP No. 106002 of 2019

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

duties beyond the procedure in the appointment order or under the general recruitment rules, it would have been an altogether different circumstance. Both of them have joined within the time and both of them have joined pursuant to the same appointment order.

¶42

The respondent No.6 is now placed senior in the seniority list for the reason that the respondent No.6 is senior in age to the petitioner. Even the said placement cannot be found fault with as if the seniority list is to be drawn on a common appointment order. It is only a common appointment order, it would be on merit or if the merit is not the criteria, it would be on the basis of age. Whoever is senior in age will be the senior if it is a common recruitment and recruitment is on the same date. Appointment orders are issued on the same day. Therefore, no fault can be found with the action of the State in placing the respondent No.6 as Headmaster over and above the claim of the petitioner. The petition lacking in merit stands rejected.

¶43

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶44

KGK /Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 19

Sri.Arun S/O. Bhagavan Patil v. He Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Arun S/O. Bhagavan Patil v. He Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri D B Lakshmanagowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S P Suresh Vs Late Smt Vinoda Satish

Sri. Siddappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Shivanand S/O Mahadevappa Waddatti Vs the Social Club Hubballi

Vasant S/O. Shamrao Jainapur Vs the Administrative Officer

Dr. V.P. Sunagar S/O Panchalingappa Vs the State of Karnataka