Karnataka High Court
Sri. N Jayaramappa vs Bangalore University on 28 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB
WA No. 304 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT APPEAL No. 304 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. N. JAYARAMAPPA,
S/O NEELAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,
UVCE, BANGALORE UNIVERSITY,
JNANABHARATHI CAMPUS,
BANGALORE-560056.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NITHIN M., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI NAGARAJAPPA A., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by VALLI AND:
MARIMUTHU
Location: High
Court of 1. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY,
Karnataka JNANABHARATHI CAMPUS,
BANGALORE-560056.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
2. DR. A. S. RAVIKUMAR,
S/O LATE ALANA SIDDAIAH,
READER, UNIVERSITY VISHWESHWARAIAH COLLEGE
OF ENGINEERING (UVCE),
BENGALURU UNIVERSITY,
BENGALURU-560056.
...RESPONDENTS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB
WA No. 304 of 2024
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDERS OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.
15747/2019 (S-RES) DATED 29.01.2024 AND ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN, AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND) This intra court appeal by the original writ petitioner in Writ Petition No.15747/2019 against the order dated 29.01.2024.
2. The petitioner-appellant was appointed as Lecturer on 25.10.2006. The grievance of the appellant is that he was eligible to the post of Professor. Respondent No.2 was appointed on the basis of the Ph.D. Degree allegedly obtained fraudulently. The appellant has further challenged the Ph.D. degree awarded to respondent No.2.
3. Respondent No.2 joined the services in respondent No.1- University in Civil Engineering Department on 10.12.1998. -3-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB WA No. 304 of 2024 Respondent No.2 secured Ph.D. decree in 2002 and promoted to the post of Reader on 26.02.2003.
4. The appellant preferred writ petition questioning the promotion of respondent No.2 from the cadre of Associate Professor to the cadre of Professor under AICTE Career Advancement Scheme, in the Department of Civil Engineering. The main ground of challenge is the qualification/eligibility of respondent No.2 contending that Ph.D. degree is not genuine.
5. Learned Single Judge after noticing that in view of the allegations made by the appellant, respondent No.1-Indian Institute of Science [IISc] in Writ Petition No.12054/2018 constituted a committee to enquire into the matter, based on the evidence concluded that respondent No.2 is not indulged in malpractice and Ph.D. degree is in accordance with law, rejected the contention. 5.1 Learned Single Judge further held that the petitioner is questioning the promotion and the Ph.D. degree with undue delay and is an attempt to harass respondent No.2 without just cause. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. -4-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB WA No. 304 of 2024
6. Learned Counsel for appellant reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition, submits that Ph.D. degree awarded by IISc to respondent No.2 is not genuine. The promotion on the basis of said Ph.D. degree is incorrect. Without Ph.D. degree, respondent No.2 has no adequate qualification and is not eligible to be promoted to the cadre of Professor.
7. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant.
8. The appellant was appointed as Lecturer on 25.10.2006. Whereas, respondent No.2 was appointed as Lecturer on 26.11.1998. Respondent No.2 was awarded Ph.D. on 22.06.2002 by the governing council of IISc. On the basis of Ph.D. degree, respondent No.2 was appointed as Reader. The representation made by the appellant to IISc on 18.09.2014 seeking forfeiture of Ph.D. decree was inquired by the Committee of Deans of IISc. The committee by order dated 25.07.2016, on enquiry, found that respondent No.2 has not cheated IISc while pursuing Ph.D. degree and also stated that respondent No.2 was not involved in any fraudulent activities nor any impropriety on the part of respondent No.3 in obtaining Ph.D. degree at the institute. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB WA No. 304 of 2024
9. Learned Single Judge considering the contentions raised and also the submissions of IISc held that Ph.D. decree is genuine in view of the report of the Committee of IISc. The qualification to the post of reader is Ph.D. with First Class Bachelors or Masters Degree in appropriate branch of Engineering with experience of three years teaching, industry and research as Lecturer or equivalent. The petitioner was not qualified to be appointed as Reader on 2002. Learned Single Judge has recorded the findings as under, "14. In light of these considerations, this Court is inclined to characterize the petitioner's challenge as an attempt to harass respondent No.3 without just cause. Such a characterization is substantiated by lack of a valid legal basis for the allegations, coupled with the temporal incongruity in raising objections to the academic qualifications and subsequent promotion of respondent No.3. It becomes imperative to discern between genuine grievances and endeavors driven by extraneous motives, ensuring that the Court remains a bastion of justice rather than a forum for unwarranted vexation. Therefore this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned decision of the committee of Deans of respondent No.1-IISc and also the order of respondent No.2-University granting promotion to respondent No.3 to the post of Professor.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB WA No. 304 of 2024
15. The Ph.D. degree awarded to respondent No.3 in 2002 cannot be interfered with at this juncture. The promotion granted to respondent No.3 as a Reader in 2003 was never called in question by the petitioner. Consequently, the second promotion which is based on recommendation of Selection Committee meeting held on 17.01.2019 thereby promoting the respondent No.3 from the cadre of Assistant Professor to the cadre of Professor also does not warrant any indulgence at the hands of this Court."
10. Respondent No.2 was appointed as Reader, then promoted to Associate Professor on the basis of Ph.D. degree, without changing the earlier promotions, it is not open to the appellant to change promotion of respondent No.2 from Associate Professor to Professor.
11. On consideration of the grounds raised, submissions and the findings recorded by learned Single Judge, we find no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by learned Single Judge. As held by learned Single Judge, the appellant is dragging respondent No.2 in Court proceedings without just reason and is an attempt to harass him without just cause. This Court is of the view that this appeal is abuse of process, devoid of merit and intended to harass respondent No.2. The appeal is liable to be dismissed with costs. -7-
NC: 2024:KHC:24234-DB WA No. 304 of 2024
12. In view of the above, the writ appeal is dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/- to be payable to the Karnataka Legal Services Authority within six weeks from the date of the order.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE MV, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21