Dismissed

B.Kumara Swamy, v. The Commissioner and Director of School Education

Telangana HC1 Mar 2016WP/17178/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging non-appointment as a Junior Lecturer due to the university’s de-recognition post-graduation. The court held the employer could act upon fresh notifications and the petitioner should approach the court only if a fresh cause of action arises upon a new notification ignoring the case. Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

B.Kumara Swamy, Vs The Commissioner and Director… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

[Special Original Jurisdiction]

¶3

TUESDAY THE FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 17178 OF 2009

¶7

Between: B. Kumara Swamy … Petitioner V/s. The Commissioner & Director of School Education Hyderabad & Anr. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri G. Tuhin Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Higher Education The Court made the following: [order follows]

¶8

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 17178 OF 2009

¶10

O R D E R :

¶11

The petitioner prays for mandamus and the prayer reads thus:

¶12

“a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner to the post of Junior Lecturer [English] [Contract basis] on the ground that the certificate issued by the Kalinga University, Raipur, Chattisgarh which is de-notified after 2006 as illegal, arbitrary, untenable, violative of the provisions of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Lecturer [English] [Contract basis] on the basis of the certificate issued by the Kalinga University, Raipur, Chattisgarh.”

¶13

2. The petitioner claims to have pursued B.Ed. from Magad

¶14

University in the year 1998-99. On 28/07/2009 a notification for recruitment of Junior Lecturers on contract basis was issued by the respondents. The petitioner claims that he satisfies the educational qualification stipulated in the notification. The petitioner claims to have completed Post Graduation in M.A. [English] from Kalinga University, Raipur, Chattisgarh State. Admittedly, Kalinga University was de-recognised by the competent authority and by reference to subsequent derecognisation, the case of petitioner is not considered and his application is not received by respondents. Hence, the writ

¶15

petition.

¶16

3. Sri G. Thuhin Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner vehemently contends that de-recognisation, if any, subsequent to the completion of Post Graduation by the petitioner can’t be considered. The University is not de-recognised for the period of petitioner’s study. He prays for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as contract Lecturer.

¶17

4. This Court is of the view, the process initiated through notification dated 28/07/2009 could have been completed long ago. The petitioner relies upon subsequent withdrawal of derecognisation of Kalinga University by the competent authority. If that being the case, as and when fresh notification is issued and the petitioner applies afresh and his application is not considered or fresh cause of action arises and the petitioner can certainly approach this court for suitable remedy by impleading the University as well.

¶18

5. With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶19

6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in

¶20

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶21

__________________ JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶22

01/03/2016 I s L

¶23

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶24

WRIT PETITION NO. 17178 OF 2009

¶25

Date: 01/03/2016 Circulation No. Court Master: I s L

B.Kumara Swamy, v. The Commissioner and Director of School Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Kumara Swamy, v. The Commissioner and Director of School Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Depot manager, Vs Sri K.Jayaprakash

Polisetty Madhusudhan Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

A. Vemavaram Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Vs The District Level Committee

G.N.B. Anjaneyulu Vs The Joint Registrar / District Cooperative Officer

Devireddy Raveendra Kumar Reddy Vs Naru Venkata Reddy

D. Prabhakar Rao Vs The Principal Secretary