Dr. Ravikumar B C Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Dr. Ravikumar B C Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, on ceasing to be Director-cum-Dean, could revert to or continue in the post of Principal until superannuation — i.e., whether his appointment as Principal was substantive or temporary and whether any lien attaches to the post of Principal. +2 more

Court's answer

From the order of appointment, the petitioner's appointment to the post of Principal was on a temporary basis, until further orders, and not substantive.

Ratio / Principle

An appointment expressed as 'until further orders' is temporary and subject to review or revocation by the Government; the employee's lien continues in the parent cadre, which for the petitioner is that of Professor.

Key takeaways

A tenure post is neither a permanent nor a temporary post; on completion of his tenure as Director, the petitioner was entitled to revert to the post of Professor in the Department of Dermatology.ratio¶45
The petitioner was appointed as Dean-cum-Director in 2019 as the senior-most Professor fulfilling the Rule 18 qualifications of the Rules of 2013, not because he was Principal; he therefore retained the post of Professor and not Principal, and had ceased to be Principal.ratio¶45
By the amendment to the bye-laws of respondent No.2, the tenure of Principal was fixed at 4 years; the petitioner having once completed a term as Principal and thereafter served as in-charge Director, regular Director and Dean, cannot be re-appointed as Principal — answering the challenge based on prospective operation of the 2023 amendments.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service — Writ Petition (S-RES) under Articles 226/227 dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka (Ashok S. Kinagi, J.), 24.11.2025. HELD: (i) The petitioner's appointment as Principal, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences (13.10.2014) was expressly 'until further orders' — a temporary, administrative posting subject to review or revocation by the Government; lien continues in the parent cadre, which is that of Professor. (ii) The post of Principal is not a substantive/cadre post (cadre posts being Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor per Rule 8(7), KCS Rules, Notification dated 01.03.1958) and no lien attaches to it; a Government servant cannot hold two substantive posts in different cadres. (iii) A tenure post is neither permanent nor temporary; on completion of tenure as Director the incumbent reverts to his substantive Professor post. (iv) The amended bye-laws/C&R Rules fix a 4-year tenure for Principal with no second term; having served as Principal and later as in-charge Director, regular Director and Dean, the petitioner was ineligible for continuance or reappointment. (v) Selection of respondent No.4 by the Selection Committee on seniority-cum-merit from the five senior-most willing Professors, without advertisement, conforms to the C&R Rules and was duly approved by the Government. L.R. Patil distinguished as facts entirely different; Dr. S.K. Kacker and Ramlal Khurana applied; S.N. Maity, Dr. B.O. Hanumanthappa and Aphali Pharmaceuticals explained; C.R. Rangadhamaiah referred. Writ petition dismissed; pending interlocutory applications disposed.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO. 32965 OF 2025 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

DR. RAVIKUMAR B C S/O LATE B S CHANNAKESHAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS PRINCIPAL HASSAN INSTITUE OF MEDICAL SCINCES SRI CHAMARAJENDRA HOSPITAL CAMPUS HASSAN 573 201

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI. M.S. BHAGWAT, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY M S BUILDING BANGALORE 560 001

HASSAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AN AUTONOMOUS MEDICAL INSTITUTION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI CHAMARAJENDRA HOPSITAL CAMPUS HASSAN 573201

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN HASSAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES SRI CHAMARAJENDRA HOSPITAL CAMPUS HASSAN 573201

DR. KAVITHA C V MAJOR WORKING AS PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF OPHTHAMOLOGY HASSAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCINECES SRI CHAMARAJENDRA HOPITAL CAMPUS HASSAN 573 201

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. REUBEN JACOB, AAG A/W SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1

V/O DATED 03.11.2025 NOTICE TO R4 IS DEFERRED FOR TIME BEING.

SRI. PREETHAM JUDE CORREA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM RESPONDENTS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30/10/2025 (ANNEXURE-W) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30/10/2025 BEARING NO.MED 12 KUM 2025 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-W) AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO 3 TO CONTINUE THE PETITIONER AS PRINCIPAL, HASSAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, HASSAN AND GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking for the following reliefs:

(i) To call for records from respondents pertaining to the impugned order dated 30/10/2025 (Annexure-W) quashing the impugned order dated 30.10.2025 bearing No.Med 12 Kum 2025, passed by respondent No.1 (Annexure-W) and consequently, direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to continue the petitioner as Principal, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan and grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner."

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:

The petitioner was appointed as a Professor in the Department of Dermatology at respondent No.2 Institute on 31.07.2006 and he reported for duty on 01.08.2006. The Cadre and Recruitment Rules, 2013 (8 Rules of 2013 9, for short) for teaching staff of

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

respondent No.2 - Institute, have been framed by respondent No.3, in accordance with the Memorandum of Association and the Rules and Regulations of 2013. A Notification was issued inviting the eligible candidates for a walk-in interview for the said post, prescribing the requisite qualifications and experience, on 26.07.2014. In continuation of the said Notification, the petitioner was called for an interview scheduled on 31.07.2014 before the Director of Medical Education, Bengaluru. The petitioner was appointed as Principal on 13.10.2014. Respondent No.3 issued an order appointing the petitioner as a Director (in charge) of Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan with effect from 14.09.2015 for three years or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

On 26.12.2019, the petitioner was appointed as a Director and Dean of Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan, for four years with effect from the

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

said date. In 2023, the Cadre and Recruitment Rules of respondent No.2 Institute were amended. One Dr.Santhosh S.V., Professor and Head of the Department of Psychiatry, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, was placed in-charge, Director and Dean of the Institute until the post is filled on a regular basis or until further orders, whichever is earlier, while directing the petitioner to continue in his substantive post as a Professor, Department of Dermatology, on 22.12.2023.

Respondent No.2 amended its Memorandum of Association and Bye-laws in 2024.

Aggrieved by the Order dated 22.12.2023, placing Dr.Santhosh S.V. as the in-charge Director and Dean of the Institute, the petitioner addressed a representation dated 04.01.2024 to the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Medical Education seeking restoration of his lien over the post of

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Principal. Pursuant to which, vide order dated 09.02.2024, the earlier order dated 22.12.2023 was modified, directing that the petitioner shall continue in the post of Principal, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan.

When things stood thus, a Meeting of the Selection Committee was conveyed on 30.10.2025, under the chairmanship of Principal Secretary, Department of Medical Education, to consider the appointment to the post of Principal, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan. As recorded in the Minutes of the said Meeting, the Committee took note that the petitioner was continued as the Principal pursuant to the order dated 09.02.2024. However, in light of the amendment to the Cadre and Recruitment Rules introducing a fixed tenure for the post, the Committee resolved not to consider the petitioner for continuation in the said service and instead, recommended the appointment of Dr. Kavita C.V.,

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

i.e., respondent No.4 as the Principal, for 3 years or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

The petitioner aggrieved by the order of Selection Committee dated 30.10.2025, filed this writ petition.

The respondent-Institution has not filed the statement of objections.

The respondent-State filed its statement of objections contending that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine . It is contended that the order dated 30.10.2025, issued by respondent No.1, was not punitive in nature, and had merely implemented the recommendation of duly constituted Selection Committee, meeting held on 30.07.2025, which recommended the appointment of respondent No.4 as a regular Principal of Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences. The petitioner accordingly was directed to

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

continue in his substantive post of Professor in the Department of Dermatology, which is his parent cadre. The post of Principal in an autonomous Medical Institution is an administrative post, to be filled among the eligible Professors. It is neither a separate substantive cadre, nor does any lien attached to it. The order therefore does not amount to removal, reversion or reduction in rank, and no civil consequences in the nature of penalty arises so as to attract the principles of natural justice.

The petitioner was appointed as a Professor on 31.07.2006. However, the interference in the service history confers any vested or permanent right to the post of the Principal, is specifically denied. The appointments to the administrative positions in the autonomous Medical Institutions are made strictly in accordance with the Cadre and Recruitment Rules ( <C&R Rules= , for short) and the rules and regulations framed under the respective

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Memorandum of Association of the Society. These points are always subject to tenure and policy and the employee's lien, continues only in the teaching cadre.

In 2013, the Memorandum of Association, Rules and Bye-laws of Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences were duly registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.

Rule 20 thereof provides that the appointments shall be made as per the C and R Rules, and the State Reservation Policy, and that the Senior-most Professor may be placed as a Principal to assist the Dean-cum-Director. The Rule, nowhere declares that the post of Principal as a permanent cadre post or as one carrying an independent lien. The Appointment is purely by selection, on order of the competent authority and is liable to change upon the expiry of tenure or on administrative grounds. Hence, the

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

reliance on Rule 20 by the petitioner to claim

permanency is misconceived.

The 2013 Rules prescribe the qualification and experience, but did not specify any fixed tenure. However, in the absence of a tenure, the Clause cannot be interpreted to mean perpetual appointment. Every order of appointment issued under those Rules, including that of the petitioner dated 13.10.2014, specifically used the expression 8 or until further orders 9. This placed the evidence of intention of such post is temporary and subject to the review or revocation by the Government or the competent authority at any time. The lien of an individual continues in his parent cadre.

The Notification dated 26.07.2014, inviting applications, the interview proceedings on 31.07.2014 and the subsequent Governing Council approval culminating in order dated 13.10.2014, are

11 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

a matter of record. The appointment order

categorically states, until further orders , this shows that the petitioner held the post of Principal on temporary basis and not as a substantive promotion from the Professor's cadre. He was successively placed as an in-charge Director from 2015 to 2019, and as a regular Director and Dean from 2019 to 2023 under Government Orders. On completion of the said tenures, by the Government Order dated 22.12.2023, he was reverted to his original cadre of Professor (Dermatology). As such, the reversion was in accordance with the established practice applicable to all Autonomous Institutes and does not constitute a reduction in rank.

It is contended that the subsequent amendments, that were effected to Memorandum of Association, Bye-laws and C&R Rules, introduced for the first time, a fixed tenure of 4 years or until the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier, for the post of

12 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Principal and specifically, prohibited reappointment for a second term. These amendments were approved by the Governing Council and ratified by the Government, and were made applicable to all future appointments and continuations. The petitioner, having already served a full term Principal from 2015 to 2019 and a further term as a Director from 2019 to 2020, stood ineligible for continuation. The State Government, therefore, acted strictly in conformity with the governing statutory framework.

The recommendation for respondent No.4, for appointment as a regular Principal, is in accordance with the Memorandum of Association, Bye-laws and C&R Rules. Thus, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

Heard Sri M.S.Bhagwat, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Reuben Jacob, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondentState.

13 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was selected and appointed to the post of Principal, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan, on 13.10.2014, pursuant to the transparent and competitive process conducted by a duly constituted Selection Committee. The order dated 13.10.2014 was preceded through selection process at the hands of the Governing Council, drawn on 31.07.2014, as well as on 08.09.2014. The Rules of 2013 prescribed the eligibility criteria, qualifications and method of selection for the post of Principal, but did not prescribe any tenure restriction or fixed term of service. The petitioner's appointment was made on a regular and substantive basis, and his lien stood permanently fixed in the cadre of the Principal, signifying a substantive appointment and not a contractual or temporary engagement. He also submitted that the appointment of the petitioner as the Principal was ratified by respondent No.3 in its

14 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

20^th meeting held on 08.09.2014, presided over by the then Hon'ble Minister for Medical Education and the order of appointment dated 13.10.2014, was issued. He submits that the appointment of the petitioner as the Principal was on a regular basis and

his lien subsists against the post of Principal. The appointment made under 2013 Rules cannot be reopened in the guise of implementation of 2023 Recruitment Rules. The appointment which has become final cannot be altered by respondent No.1. The 2023 amendment to the Cadre and Recruitment Rules, 2013, introducing a tenure limitation of 4 years for the post of the Principal is purely prospective in operation and does not contain any saving clause affecting existing incumbents.

He also submitted that the impugned action of removing the petitioner from the post of Principal and fixing his lien in the cadre of Professor amounts to a retrospective application of 2023 Rules to an

15 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

appointment made under the 2013 Rules, and therefore is arbitrary, ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The action of respondent No.1 displacing the petitioner from the post of the Principal, directing the petitioner to report as a Professor, is wholly illegal and amounts to reversion of the petitioner to a lower post. He submits that the petitioner is the senior-most employee and he is eligible for the post of Principal. The recommendation by the Selection Committee for appointing respondent No.4 is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the governing Rules.

To buttress his arguments, he has placed reliance on the judgments in the following cases:

(i) Decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in L.R.Patil vs. Gulbarga University, Gulbarga, in Civil Appeal No.3254 of 2013 disposed of on 04.09.2023;

16 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

(ii) Decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India and another vs. S.N.Maity and another , reported in (2015) 4 SCC 164 .

(iii) Decision of this Court in Dr.B.O.Hanumanthappa vs. the State of Karnataka and others, in W.P. No.15429 of 2017 disposed of on 25.06.2024.

(iv) Decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Mrs.Aphali Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. the State of Maharashtra and others , reported in (1989) 4 SCC 378 .

He submitted that when an appointment is made until further orders, it does not entitles the employer to exercise its power arbitrarily or capriciously. He submitted that the lien on the original post revives when the tenure appointment comes to an end. He submitted that when there is a conflict between the Rules and Regulations, and, the Recruitment Rules framed under the Rules and Regulations, the former prevails. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition.

17 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Per contra , the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the post of Principal was temporary, i.e., the appointment of the petitioner as a Principal was until further orders. The expression < or until further orders = means it is a temporary post. He submitted that the role of Principal, Dean and Director are often considered the selection posts or tenure posts with a limited term. The appointment to these administrative roles does not automatically create a new, permanent lien or terminate the original one, unless explicitly stated that new appointment is substantive and permanent, and the previous lien is formally terminated.

He also submitted that a lien is the legal right of a Government employee to hold a permanent post, to which they have been appointed substantively. It is the foundational, permanent position in the cadre and that the employee has a right to return.

18 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

He also submitted that the Hassan Institute has brought an amendment to the Memorandum of Association, Bye-laws and Cadre and Recruitment Rules. As per the C&R Rules, the post of Principal is for a limited term i.e., four years. He also submitted that the petitioner was once appointed as a Principal and completed his tenure and he was subsequently appointed as an in-charge Director, regular Director and Dean. As the petitioner has completed his term as a Principal, he cannot be reappointed as a Principal. He also submitted that there cannot be a lien on the temporary post. But the lien can only be on a permanent post.

To buttress his arguments, he has placed reliance on the following judgments:

(i) The decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dr.S.Kacker vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Others reported in (1996) 10 SCC 734 ;

19 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

(ii) Order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No.1024 of 2023 , disposed of on 01.02.2025 in the case of Dr.Mahendra B.J. vs. the State of Karnataka and others.

(iii) He also placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of the Chairman, Railway Board and others vs. C.R.Rangadhamaiah and others reported in (1997) 6 SCC 623 .

He submitted that the recommendation of respondent No.4 as Principal is in accordance with the Bye-laws, Memorandum of Association, Cadre and Recruitment Rules.

The Additional Advocate General further submitted that the appointment of a Dean and Director was as per Rule 18 of the Rules of 2013, which provides that the Government shall appoint first the Dean-cumDirector after getting satisfied as to his or her qualification specified in Clause (3) for a maximum period of four years or superannuation, whichever is

20 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

earlier, and he also submitted that the term of the Dean-cum-Director so appointed shall be for four years and there shall be no extension of the term and he submitted that the word < cadre = is defined in Rule 8(7) of Karnataka Civil Services Rules Notification dated 01.03.1958. He submitted that a senior is meant for a cadre and not for the appointment to the post of Director, Principal or Medical Superintendent post. He submits that the petitioner was first appointed as a Professor on selection until further orders. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.

Learned counsel for respondent No.4 adopts the arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General, and prays to dismiss the writ petition.

Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

21 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner was

appointed as the Principal in Hassan Institute of Medical Science ('HIMS', for short) on 13.10.2014 until further orders. The petitioner was appointed as

a an incharge Director with an effect from 14.09.2015 for three years or until further orders whichever is earlier. He was appointed as a regular Director on 26.12.2019 for four years. During 2023, HIMS amended the C&R Rules of respondent No.2. As per the amended C&R Rules, one Dr. Santhosh S.V, Professor was appointed as a incharge Director and Dean of respondent No.2 until the post is filled on a regular basis or until further orders and directing the petitioner to continue his substantive post as a Professor, Department of Dermatology.

Respondent No.2 amended its memorandum of Association and its bye-laws constituting the Selection Committee for recruitment for the post of Principal/Medical Superintendent /Special Officer and

22 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

the Selection Committee members shall be separated

(a) Government Department of Medical (Chairman) (b) Director of Medical Education (Vice Chairman) (c) The Registrar, Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Sciences, (d) Director /Director cum Dean of the institute (e) Chief Administrative officer (CAO) of the Institute (Member Secretary).

The Selection Committee by following the Cadre and Recruitment Rules - 2023 for the post of the Principal in the case of Medical colleges. The tenure for the Principal shall not be more than 4 years or superannuation, whichever is earlier. No Principal will be eligible for a second term. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Medical Education, Government of Karnataka, Bengaluru, seeking requisition to re-allot the lien over the post of Principal.

23 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

The Chief secretary, Additional chief secretary,

passed an order directing the petitioner to continue in the post of Principal in respondent No.2 - college vide order dated 09.02.2024 vide Annexure-T. When the petitioner was continued to work as a Principal,

the Selection Committee conveyed a meeting on 30.07.2025 to consider the appointment to the post of Principal of respondent No.2. In the said meeting, a resolution was passed taking into consideration the amendments to the cadre and recruitment rules introducing the fixed tenure for the said post and the committee resolved not to consider the petitioner for continuation and recommended the appointment of Dr. Kavitha C.V i.e., respondent No.4 as a Principal for 3 years or until further orders whichever is earlier as per Annexure-V.

The appointment of the petitioner as a Principal was until further orders. The expression until further orders contemplates that the appointment is for a

24 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

temporary period and subject to the review or revocation by the Government. The lien of the individual continues in his parent cadre i.e., the petitioner was appointed as a Professor. The lien serves as a civil right for an employee, to hold his/her substantive post, ensuring that they can return to it if temporary or new appointment ends for any reason other than permanent absorption. The lien on a permanent post can only be terminated, if the employee acquires a lien or another permanent post outside their original cadre or if the termination does not leave the employee without a lien or suspended lien on a permanent post. If the rules governing the transfer or new appointment, do not explicatively terminate the original lien, it is deemed to continue protecting the employee's seniority and other benefits.

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

25 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

L.R.Patil vs. Gulbarga University, Gulbarga in

Civil Appeal No.3254 of 2013 , wherein it is held that, 8lien9 of a government servant only ceases to exist when he/she is appointed on another post 8substantively9 confirmed or absorbed permanently. Otherwise, his/her lien would continue on the previous post.

The previous post of the petitioner was a Professor and not as a Principal. The post of the Principal was only for a temporary period and not substantively.

From the perusal of the order of appointment of Principal, clearly indicate that the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Principal was on temporary basis until further orders.

In the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of L.R.Patil ( supra ), the petitioner was appointed for the post of Assistant Registrar through direct recruitment, on his

26 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

appointment he was relieved from the post of the office of superintendent and he was being relieved to accept another appointment as a Assistant Registrar in Gulbarga University. In the said case, the appellant did not retained in the previous post of his superintendent.

The Hon'ble Apex Court referring to Rule 20 of KCS Rules held that if the Government servant seeks appointment in another unit or Department or in another cadre or grade in the same Department under the rules, his or her lien on the original appointment shall be continued to be maintained until observed in the Department or cadre in which he or she is newly appointed. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the case on hand.

Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex

27 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Court in the case of Union of India and another

vs. S.N. Maity and another reported in ( 2015) 4 SCC 164 , wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that where an appointment made "until the further orders", it does not entitle the employer to exercise

its power arbitrarily or capriciously. In the said case, the respondents were appointed on deputation basis for a period of 5 years or until further orders and it is the prerogative of the employee to recall him to the parent Department without assigning any reasons.

The Hon'ble Apex Court held that the notification of appointment makes it absolutely clear that it is a tenure posting and the fixed tenure is 5 years unless it is curtailed. However, its curtailment cannot be done arbitrarily or capriciously. There has to be some rationale. Merely because the expression 'until further orders' is used, it would not confer any power to the employer to act capriciously.

28 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of

Dr.B.O.Hanumanthappa vs. State of Karnataka in W.P.No.15429 of 2017 and connected matters, disposed of on 25.06.2024 wherein the Division Bench, placing reliance on Rules 19 and 20 of the KCS Rules, held that the Government servant when remains absent over a period of time or periods of time retains lien over his/her post subject to the lien being suspended or terminated under different circumstances as enumerated in sub-clause (a) to (e) of Rule 20 of the KCS Rules.

In the said case of Hanumanthappa ( supra ), a lien of original post revives when a tenure comes to an end. He has also placed reliance on the judgment in

the case of M/s.Aphali Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in ( 1989) 4 SCC 378 , held that in case of a conflict

29 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

between the Rules and Regulations, and the Recruitment Rules framed under the said Rules and Regulations, the former will prevail.

In the instant case, the question arise whether the petitioner on ceasing to be a Director cum Dean from the date of appointment as Director could revert to or continue in the post of the Principal till he attains superannuation. The post of Director is not a permanent post. Generally, the nature of the posts can be divided into two types, namely a permanent post and a temporary post; the tenure post is neither a permanent post nor a temporary post. Therefore, on completion of his tenure as a Director he is entitle to revert to the post of the Professor in the Department of Dermatology. That is because as per Rule 18 of the Rules of 2013, the Dean cum Director to be appointed, must have the ten years of teaching experience as a Professor / Associate Professor out of which he must be the head of any particular

30 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Department with the administrative experience for five years. Hence, the petitioner was appointed as Dean of the Respondent -institution as he had fulfilled the qualification, required under Rule 18 of the Rules of 2013. Thus, the petitioner was appointed as the Dean-cum-Director of the respondent-institution, in 2019, as he was the senior most Professor of the Respondent -institution, who had fulfilled the qualification, as required under Rule 18 of the Rules of 2013, and not because he was in the post of the Principal. Hence, the petitioner has retained his post as a Professor and not as a Principal. The petitioner therefore had cease to be a Principal.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Dr.S.K.Kacker vs. All India Institute of Medical

Sciences and others ( supra ) held in paragraph No.10 as follows:

31 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

"10. It would indicate that on appointment to a permanent post, be it under the Central Government or the state Government, outside the cadre on which he is borne, his lien on the previous permanent post stands terminated on his acquiring a lien in a permanent post. The post of Director is not in the same cadre as the post of Professor in the AIIMS. The post of Director is the Head of the AIIMS and it is independent of all the Departments. The Director is enjoined to supervise not only the administrative work of the AIIMS, but also its management for and on behalf of the Institute Body. Therefore, on his appointment to the permanent post as a Director, he lost his lien on the post as a Professor and Head of the ENT Department. Resultantly, when the tenure of the appellant had expired on/by efflux of time or in case any of the eventualities mentioned in Regulation 30-A had happened, he cannot revert to the post of Professor and Head of the Department ." (emphasis supplied)

32 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

Further, the Division Bench of this Court in the case

of Dr. Mahindra B.J vs. State of Karnataka and

others in W.A. No.1024 of 2023, disposed of on 01.02.2025, had an occasion to consider Rule 22 of KCS Rules. The Division Bench by referring to the

judgment of L.R.Patil vs. University of Gulbarga ( supra ) has recorded its finding that the Hon'ble Court was considering the question as to whether in facts of that case, joining the new post, the appellant leave on the original or previous post will be continued to be maintained, until he is permanently observed in the new Department or cadre in which he subsequently appointed. L.R.Patil was working as a office superintendent in Gulbarga university, in pursuance to the notification inviting applications to fill up the post of Assistant Registrar by direct recruitment, he applied for the said post and was selected. As his selection for the post of Assistant Registrar, L.R.Patil was relieved from the post of

33 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

office superintendent recording that he was relieved to accept another appointment as a Assistant Registrar in the same university. The fact involved in the said case are entirely different.

In the case of Ramlal Khurana (Dead) By Lrs. Vs.

State of Punjab reported in (1989) 4 SCC 99 , the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that lien is not a word of art. It just connotes the right of a civil servant to hold the post substantively to which he is appointed, meaning thereby appointment of a Government servant on the said post must be substantively and he or she cannot hold two posts simultaneously in two different cadres and maintain the lien of both posts at the same time.

In the instant case, the petitioner was appointed substantively as a Director of HIMS, could not hold two posts simultaneously in two different cadres i.e., Director of HIMS as a Professor. Moreover, the post

34 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

of Professor in respondent No.2 is filled by selection. Respondent No.4 was appointed as a Principal by Selection Committee. By way of an amendment to the bye-laws of respondent No.2, the tenure of the Principal has been fixed for 4 years. The petitioner was once appointed as a Principal and completed his tenure and he was subsequently appointed as a incharge Director, regular Director and Dean. As per the bye-laws, the petitioner cannot be re-appointed as a Principal. Lien can only be of a permanent post and a cadre post, and not for an administrative post.

The perusal of the recruitment rules, discloses that the post of Principal is a cadre post and the post of cadre post are Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor as defined under Rule 8(7) of the KCS Rules, Notification dated 01.03.1958. The lien is only in respect of cadre post and not to the post of Principal. As per the rules and regulations the appointment of medical, para medical and

35 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

administrative staff i.e., all the appointment to the institution shall be done on the basis of provisions of C&R Rules subject to the reservation policy on the state Government. i.e., the senior most Professor of the institution shall be appointed as a Principal to assist the Dean and Director and shall be placed incharge of the duties by the Dean and Director during his leave period or absence from the duty on the official assignment in addition to his designated duties and responsibilities and he shall assist the Director in the academic activities of the college. Insofar as the appointment of a Dean and Director is concerned, the Government shall appoint the first Dean-cum-Director after getting satisfied to his or her qualification and eligibility specified in clause 3, for maximum period of 4 years or superannuation whichever is earlier. The term of Dean cum Director so appointed shall be for 4 years and there shall be no extension. As observed above, the lien of the

36 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

petitioner will be on the post of the Professor and not on the post of Principal.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent while selecting respondent No.4 as a Principal have not issued any notification inviting the applications from the eligible candidates. However, the C & R Rules, provides that the candidates for the post of Principal shall be selected based on senioritycum-merit from amongst the teachers in the same autonomous Institution, five senior-most willing Professors as per the seniority list shall be considered by the Governing Council for the said appointment and the said candidates shall satisfy the Medical Council of India norms for the appointment. The perusal of the C&R Rules disclose that no where, it provides for the selection on the basis of application called through public

notice/advertisement. Further, the post of Principal is not a higher substantive rank but as an

37 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

administrative responsibility attached to the teaching cadre. On cessation of appointment, the officer automatically resumes the duties in the substantive post. As per Article 162 of the Constitution of India, the Government is competent to regulate appointments and posting in autonomous and medical institutions. The Selection Committee recommended the appointment of respondent No.4 as a Principal and the same was approved by the Government. It is the exclusive domain of the Government under Rule 18(b) of the KCSRs, no Government servant can hold a lien of more than one

post. If the petitioner's claim on lien on the administrative post of Principal is accepted, he would automatically forfeits his lien and seniority in the cadre of Professor, which alone exempt him to be considered for the assignment of the Principal.

If a lien is urged to be against the post of Principal, that would take away his lien as a Professor and

38 - NC: 2025:KHC:49162 WP No. 32965 of 2025

HC-KAR

subsequently his seniority, which is very basic requirement for appointment to such an administrative post. Hence, the petitioner has no lien on the post of Principal as it is not a substantive post. His substantive post is Professor. Respondent No.2 has rightly passed the impugned order. I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition.

53. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is dismissed .

(ii) In view of the dismissal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are accordingly disposed of.

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

RK (1-30),SKS (31-end) CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31