The Karnataka State Road ... vs Sri.Mallikarjuna S/O Sri. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2449 Kant

                            1



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JUNE 2021

                        PRESENT
           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
                           AND
        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL

           WRIT APPEAL NO.200387/2015 (SK)

Between:

1.   The Karnataka State Road Transport
     Corporation Rep. by its
     Managing Director
     Central Offices, K.H. Road
     Bengaluru-560 027
     Now Rep. by its Chief Law Officer

2.   North East Karnataka State Road
     Transport Corporation
     Rep. by its Managing Director
     Central Office, Kalaburagi
     Now Rep. by its Chief Law Officer

3.   The Chief Personnel Officer
     Karnataka State Road Transport
     Corporation Rep. by its
     Managing Director
     Central Offices, K.H. Road
     Bengaluru-560 027
     Now Rep. by its Chief Law Officer
                                             ... Appellants

(By Smt. Ratna M. Shivayogimath, Advocate)
                               2



And:

1.     Sri Malliuka Arjuna
       S/o Sri Chandra Sha
       Aged about 59 years
       Working as Statistical Assistant
       North East Karnataka State Road
       Transport Corporation
       Kalaburagi Division, Kalaburagi
       R/o Plot No.145, Near Central Bus Stand
       CIB Colony, Kalaburagi -585 101

2.     Sri Y.B. Basappa
       Aged about 54 Years
       Working as Statistical Assistant
       Establishment Supervisor
       Grade-III, NEKSRTC
       Kalaburagi Division
       Kalaburagi - 585 101
                                              ... Respondents
(V.O.D. 23.12.2020 notice to R1 held sufficient;
 Notice to R-2 served)

     This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the High
Courts Act, praying to set aside the order dated 26.03.2015
passed by the learned single judge of this court in
W.P.No.3670/2008 (SK).
       This appeal having been heard and reserved for
judgment on 15.06.2021, coming on for pronouncement
of Judgment this day, M.G.S.Kamal J., delivered the
following:-
                         JUDGMENT

This intra court appeal is filed under Section 4 of

the High Courts Act, 1961 assailing the order dated

26.03.2015 passed in W.P.No.3670/2008 (S-KSRTC) in

and by which the appellants herein (respondent Nos.1

to 3 in the writ petition) were directed to promote the

1st respondent herein (petitioner in the writ petition) to

the post of Establishment Supervisor Class-III with all

benefits as on the date on which the 2nd respondent

herein (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) had been

promoted to the said post and to comply with the same

within a period of 12 weeks.

2. The facts in brief are that, the 1st respondent

was appointed as Junior Assistant in the 1st appellant-

Corporation on 28.08.1981 and was promoted to the

post of Statistical Assistant (Class-III) on 04.08.1999.

That the 2nd respondent herein was junior to the 1st

respondent. That an Adhoc seniority list of Statistical

Assistant and other posts was published by notification

dated 23.07.2002 in which the name of the 1st

respondent shown at Sl.No.34 while the name of the 2nd

respondent was shown at Sl.No.70. However, by an

order dated 22.02.2007, 2nd respondent was promoted

to the post of Establishment Supervisor Grade-III

ignoring the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent had

made representations in this regard which were not

considered. Being aggrieved by the same, the 1st

respondent filed the above writ petition questioning the

inaction of the appellants herein in not promoting him

even while promoting the 2nd respondent who was junior

to him.

3. The appellants herein had contended before

the learned single judge that promotion had been

granted to the 2nd respondent based on divisionwise

sonority list. Inasmuch as the 1st respondent and the

2nd respondent herein fall under different divisions, the

2nd respondent was promoted. The learned single judge

not accepting the aforesaid contention, as the same was

not supported by any material, allowed the writ petition

with the direction as stated above. Aggrieved by the

said order, the present writ appeal is filed.

4. Despite service of notice, respondent Nos.1

and 2 did not appear and contest the appeal.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants

submitted that after passing of the impugned order on

verification it was found that the name of the 2nd

respondent had appeared in the seniority list of

"Assistant" instead of seniority list of "Statistical

Assistant" due to oversight resulting in his promotion to

the post of Establishment Supervisor. It is further

submitted that on coming to know about the aforesaid

irregularity in preparation of the seniority list and

consequent promotion thereof, a notice dated

15.10.2015 was issued to the 2nd respondent herein

stating that inclusion of his name in the seniority list of

"Assistant" instead of seniority list of "Statistical

Assistant" and consequent promotion thereof was a

mistake and that the said promotion of the 2nd

respondent was required to be withdrawn and he needs

to be demoted. By the said notice, the 2nd respondent

herein was called upon to file his objections if any

within seven days from the date of receipt of the said

notice.

6. It is further submitted that subsequently by

an order dated 11.12.2015, the promotion given to the

2nd respondent to the post of Establishment Supervisor

was withdrawn and was further ordered to continue as

Statistical Assistant on determination of notional salary.

The aforesaid notice dated 15.10.2015 and order dated

11.12.2015 is produced along with Memo dated

07.08.2019.

     7.      It        is    further       submitted     that   the   1st

respondent        was         promoted       to   the    Establishment

Supervisor on 12.03.2016 and he retired from his

service after attaining the age of superannuation on

30.06.2016. It is also submitted that the 2nd respondent

herein has also retired from the service. Under the

aforesaid circumstances, the counsel for the appellants

submitted that the order of the learned single judge and

the directions made therein requires reconsideration.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants

and perused the records.

9. It is noticed that the inclusion of name of 2nd

respondent in the seniority list of "Assistant" instead of

list of "Statistical Assistant" was due to inadvertence

and that upon realizing the said inadvertent irregularity,

the appellants have issued notice dated 15.10.2015 and

thereafter order dated 11.12.2015 has been passed

withdrawing the said promotion and demoting the 2 nd

respondent to the post of Statistical Assistant from the

post of Establishment Supervisor. It is further noted

that the inclusion of name of the 2nd respondent in the

seniority list wherein he stood at Sl.No.70 while the 1st

respondent was at Sl.No.34, did not in any way affect

the process of promotion of the 1st respondent. That the

1st respondent was in fact promoted to the post of

Establishment Supervisor in usual course. The 2nd

respondent who under the aforesaid circumstances was

promoted to the post of Establishment Supervisor has

been demoted.

10. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

the case, we are of the considered opinion that nothing

further survives for consideration in this appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

BL