Vijayakumara B C vs The Principal Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 5386 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                        PRESENT

          THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

                            AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

             W.P.No.20639/2021 (S - KSAT)

BETWEEN :

1.     VIJAYAKUMARA B.C.,
       S/O LATE HANDRASHEKAR B.N.,
       AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, CATEGORY 3B
       GUEST LECTURER AT S.T.J.
       WOMENS COLLEGE,
       R/AT BIGGA DEVANAHALLI, POST: AMBLE,
       TALUK & DIST:CHIKMAGALUR-577 135.

2.     NATARAJU D.,
       S/O DODDANAGAPPA G.N.,
       AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, CATEGORY 3A
       GUEST LECTURER IN GOVT. COLLEGE
       R/AT RAMACHANDRAPPA'S OUT HOUSE,
       6TH CROSS, VIJAYAPURA,
       TQ & DIST:CHIKMAGALURU-577 101.

3.     KRISHNEGOWDA M.L.,
       S/O M.H.LOMGAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
       LECTURER IN SOCIOLOGY
       GOVT. P U COLLEGE
       POST: KODIYALA,
       TQ: SRI RANGAPATTANA
       DIST: MANDYA-571 415.

4.     I.P.NAVEEN KUMAR
       S/O I.P.PUTTEGOWDA
                           -2-

        AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
        LECTURER IN POLITICAL SCIENCE
        GOVT. COLLEGE, KURUVANKA
        TQ: ARASIKERE, DIST: HASSAN-573 103.

5.      V.G.MANJULA
        W/O JAGADISH S.M.,
        AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
        LECTURER IN BIOLOGY
        GOVT. P.U.COLLEGE, MALUR,
        TQ: MALUR , DIST: KOLAR-563 130.

6.      SHIVARAMU P.,
        S/O PANJU POOJARY
        AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
        LECTURER IN KANNADA
        GOVT. P.U.COLLEGE, AVINAHALLI,
        TQ: SAGAR
        DIST: SHIVAMOGGA-577 453               ...PETITIONERS

                   (BY SRI S.V.DESAI, ADV.)

AND :

1.      THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
        DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
        OF GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
        M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDI
        BENGALURU-560 001.

2.      THE COMMISSIONER
        COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
        SESHADRI ROAD, BENGLAURU-560 001.

3.      THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
        KARNATAKA EXAMINATION AUTHORITY
        NO.18, SAMPIGE ROAD,
        MALLESWARAM
        BENGALURU-560 012.              ...RESPONDENTS

     (BY SRI B.RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2;
               SRI N.K.RAMESH, ADV. FOR R-3.)
                          -3-

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO RECEIVE MANUAL APPLICATIONS
FROM THE PETITIONERS FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT OF ASST.
PROFESSOR POSTS IN PURSUANCE OF NOTIFICATION DATED
30.09.2021 ANNEXURE-A7 AND ALLOW THEM TO APPEAR FOR
THE EXAMINATION SUBJECT TO RESULT OF THE PENDING
APPLICATION NOS.5179-5184/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE
KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL.

      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:



                         ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking

the following relief;

"i) a Writ of Mandamus by directing the 3rd Respondent to receive an Manual applications from the petitioners for Direct Recruitment of Asst.Professor Posts in pursuance of Notification dated 30.09.2021, Annexure-A7 and allow them to appear for the Examination subject to Result of the pending Application Nos.5179-5184/2021 on the file of The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal."

2. The petitioners, working as Guest

Lecturers/Lecturers, were the aspiring candidates for

the posts of Assistant Professor as per the recruitment

notification issued by the Government of Karnataka, but

due to the age limit prescribed in the notification they

were not allowed to apply through online.

3. The petitioners assert that the

representations submitted by them to the concerned

department of the Government to give age relaxation to

apply in the forthcoming direct recruitment of Assistant

Professor posts has not been considered. It is the

grievance of the petitioners that the concession to age

relaxation given in recruitment of posts in Police

Department has not been extended to the posts of

Assistant Professor. The petitioners had filed

W.P.No.19249/2021 by seeking relaxation of age to

apply, but the said writ petition has been disposed of

with liberty to approach the Karnataka State

Administrative Tribunal. Pursuant to which, the

petitioners have filed Application Nos.5179-5184/2021

before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal,

Bengaluru, ('Tribunal' for short) which is pending

consideration. Being aggrieved by the order of the

Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal in issuing

notice to the respondents sans granting the interim

order of stay as sought for, the petitioners have

approached this Court seeking for the relief as

aforesaid.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the writ

petition would submit that the petitioners herein have

to be treated on par with the applicants in the Police

Department for whom the concession of age relaxation

in recruitment of posts has been given by the

Government of Karnataka. Accordingly, seeks to direct

respondent No.3 to receive the manual applications

from the petitioners for direct recruitment of Assistant

Professor posts pursuant to the notification dated

30.9.2021.

5. Learned counsel Sri N.K.Ramesh, appearing

for respondent No.3 would submit that the Karnataka

Education Department Services (Collegiate Education

Department)(Recruitment of Assistant Professor)

(Special) Rules, 2000, which is applicable to the case on

hand, do not permit for any age relaxation. As such, no

relief claimed by the petitioners could be considered.

6. Learned Government Pleader appearing for

respondent Nos.1 and 2 supports the submissions made

by learned counsel for respondent No.3.

7. As could be seen from the material on

record, Application Nos.5179-5184/2021 filed by the

petitioners is pending consideration before the Tribunal.

8. It is clear that the petitioners are seeking

relaxation of the Rules inasmuch as age limit is

concerned and thereby seeking a direction to

respondent No.3 to accept their applications manually.

Such relief claimed by the petitioners certainly goes

contrary to the Rules which requires to be strictly

adhered to.

9. In the case of Bedanga Talukdar v.

Saifudaullah Khan & Ors, reported in (2011) 12

SCC 85, the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically

observed that no relaxation of the terms and conditions

of the notification could be made without there being

any such notification issued by the competent

authority. The relevant portion of the judgment reads

thus;

"29. ................. The selection process has to be conducted strictly in accordance with the stipulated selection procedure. Consequently, when a particular schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has to be scrupulously maintained. There cannot be any relaxation in the terms and conditions of the advertisement unless such a power is

specifically reserved. Such a power could be reserved in the relevant Statutory rules. Even if power of relaxation is provided in the rules, it must still be mentioned in the advertisement. In the absence of such power in the Rules, it could still be provided in the advertisement. However, the power of relaxation, if exercised, has to be given due publicity. This would be necessary to ensure that those candidates who become eligible due to the relaxation, are afforded an equal opportunity to apply and compete. Relaxation of any condition in advertisement without due publication would be contrary to the mandate of equality contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India."

10. The relief claimed by the petitioners amounts

to rewriting the terms and conditions of the recruitment

notification which would be contrary to the well settled

principles of law. Hence, we are not inclined to grant

the relief as claimed by the petitioners.

11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands

dismissed as devoid of merits. It is needless to observe

that the Tribunal shall dispose of the main matter as

expeditiously as possible in accordance with law

without being influenced by any of the observations

made hereinabove.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

nd