Karnataka High Court
The Vice Chancellor vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 January, 2023
Bench: Alok Aradhe, S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
WA No. 1237 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1237 OF 2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR
BENGALURU CITY UNIVERSITY
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE REGISTRAR
BENGALURU CITY UNIVERSITY
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally
signed by B A ...APPELLANTS
KRISHNA
KUMAR (BY SRI G.S. KANNUR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
Location:
High Court of SRI RAKSHITH JOIS Y.P., ADV.)
Karnataka
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER
EDUCATION (HIGHER EDUCATION)
M.S. BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. DR. NARASIMHAMURHTY N
S/O NARASAHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
WORKING AS PROFESSOR &
CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION
BENGALURU CITY UNIVERSITY
-2-
WA No. 1237 of 2022
BENGALURU - 560 009
R/AT NO.22 1ST CROSS, GKW
LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA
BENGALURU - 560 040.
3. DR. JYOTHI VENKATESH
PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF
GLOBAL LANGUAGE
BENGALURU CITY UNIVERSITY
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI TRIVIKRAM S., ADV., FOR C/R-2;
SRI B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R-1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATA KA HIGH
COURT ACT,1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER
DATED 08/11/2022 PASSED IN WP NO.21203/2022 BY THE SINGLE
BENCH OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK
ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This intra court appeal has been filed against an order
dated 08.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge by which,
the writ petition preferred by respondent No.2 has been
allowed and the notification dated 18.10.2022 by which the
aforesaid respondent was relieved from the post of Dean,
Department of Arts and respondent No.3 was appointed as a
Dean has been quashed.
WA No. 1237 of 2022
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated
are respondent No.2 who was professor in Department of Arts
in Bengaluru City University was nominated as a Dean in the
Faculty of Arts initially for a period from 01.03.2019 to
28.02.2021. Thereafter, by notification dated 11.02.2021,
respondent No.2 was continued as Dean of Arts Department for
further period of 2 years from 01.03.2021. The term of
respondent No.2 as Dean is upto 28.02.2023.
3. The respondent No.2 had functioned as Chairman,
Board of studies in Journalism. There were some allegations
with regard to functioning of respondent No.2 as Chairman,
Board of Studies in Journalism. Therefore, show-cause notice
dated 06.07.2022 was issued to him asking him to show cause
as to why he should not be removed from the post of Dean.
The petitioner submitted a reply on 08.07.2022. Thereafter, the
appellant-University issued the impugned notification dated
18.10.2022 by which respondent No.2 was relieved from the
post of Dean, Department of Arts and respondent No.3 was
appointed in his place.
4. Respondent No.2 challenged the validity of the
aforesaid order in a writ petition before the learned Single
WA No. 1237 of 2022
Judge. The learned Single Judge by an order dated 08.11.2022
has allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent No.2. In
the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submitted
that a show-cause notice was issued to respondent No.2 and in
reply to the aforesaid show-cause notices, respondent No.2
pointed out that show-cause notice contains grammatical
mistakes and proper show-cause notice should be issued to him
and thereafter he would submit reply. It is further submitted
that in the facts of the case, the appellant-University was
justified in issuing impugned notification dated 18.10.2022.
6. We have considered the submission made by
learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and have perused the
records.
7. Admittedly, the University by a notification dated
11.02.2021 appointed respondent No.2 as a Dean for a period
of 2 years from 01.03.2021. The appellant-University by issuing
a show-cause notice to respondent No.2 had sought his
removal from the post of Dean on the basis of his performance
as Chairman, Board of Studies in Journalism. The appellant-
WA No. 1237 of 2022
University in the writ petition was unable to point out any
statutory provisions which enables it to restrict or reduce the
tenure of two years of a Dean. It is pertinent to note that
respondent No.2 was not sought to be removed on the basis of
proved misconduct or any allegation pertaining to moral
turpitude. In the absence of any allegation against respondent
No.2 with regard to his functioning as a Dean of Arts
Department, the appellate-University could not have restricted
tenure by issuing the impugned notification dated 18.10.2022.
For the aforementioned reasons, we are in agreement
with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. In the result,
we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same fails and is
hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
NMS
