Dr. Lingaraju T.S vs The National Institute Of Mental Health ...

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15049 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 June, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Dr. Lingaraju T.S vs The National Institute Of Mental Health ... on 28 June, 2024

                                              -1-
                                                       NC: 2024:KHC:24063-DB
                                                           WA No. 702 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. 702 OF 2024 (S-RES)

                   BETWEEN:

                   DR. LINGARAJU T.S.,
                   AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
                   ASSISTANT PROFESSOR,
                   DEPARTMENT OF NEUROSURGERY,
                   THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL
                   HEALTH AND NEUROSCIENCES (NIMHANS),
                   HOSUR ROAD,
                   BENGALURU-560 029.
                                                                 ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. MD. AKRAM UPPIN. ADVOCATE FOR
                       SRI. RAHAMATHULLA KOTHWAL, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed   AND:
by VALLI
MARIMUTHU          1.   THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL
Location: High          HEALTH AND NEUROSCIENCES,
Court of                HOSUR ROAD,
Karnataka
                        BENGALURU-560 029.
                        BY ITS REGISTRAR.

                   2.   UNION OF INDIA BY ITS
                        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE,
                        MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE,
                        GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
                        ROOM No.156-A, NIRMAN BHAVAN,
                        NEW DELHI-110 011.
                                                            ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI B.PRAMOD, CGC FOR R2)
                                  -2-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC:24063-DB
                                               WA No. 702 of 2024




     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
INTERIM ORDER DATED 03.04.2024 PASSED BY THE SINGLE
JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP No. 28919/2023 (S-RES)
AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED
FOR.

     THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON                 FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY CHIEF JUSTICE                   DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                            JUDGMENT

The challenge is sought to be addressed to the judgment and order dated 03.04.2024 of learned Single Judge.

2. The writ petition of the appellant-petitioner was not entertained for the reasons provided in paragraph-8 of the impugned order, which reads as under, "Since respondent No.1 has issued a fresh recruitment Notification and having regard to the fact that petitioner has already applied to the post of Associate Professor of Neurosurgery and in view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for respondents, the captioned writ petition does not survive for consideration."

3. The controversy involved was about selection of the petitioner as Associate Professor of Neurosurgery. The petitioner had applied for the post pursuant to the advertisement. At the time of interview, it was turned out that the petitioner was the only candidate for the post. The standing Selection Committee found -3- NC: 2024:KHC:24063-DB WA No. 702 of 2024 the petitioner not suitable and therefore did not recommend the name of the petitioner for appointment. The petitioner's representations were rejected.

4. Learned Single Judge has recorded two aspects which are weighty enough not to entertain the present appeal. Firstly, respondent No.1-Institute has already issued fresh notification advertising the same post. It is open for the petitioner to apply again, if so advised. Secondly, it is stated that the subject matter would be triable by the Central Administrative Tribunal and not by way of writ petition.

5. In light of the totality of facts and observations made by learned Single Judge, no case is made out to interfere in the order. The appeal is thoroughly misconceived and therefore dismissed.

In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory application would not survive and stand disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

JUDGE MV, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26