Karnataka High Court
Smt. M. Sujatha vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 July, 2023
Bench: E.S.Indiresh
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.2192 OF 2021 (S-PRO)
BETWEEN:
SMT. M. SUJATHA
W/O. SRI. ARUNA KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
PRESENTLY WORKED AS HEAD MISTRESS,
BASAVESHWARA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL,
2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 010,
R/AT NO. 82, 10TH 'A' CROSS,
FIRST MAIN, 2ND STAGE,
WEST OF CHORD ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 086.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIKANTH M.P., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
CHAYA S A
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION,
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER
FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION,
NEW PUBLIC OFFICES,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
K.R. CIRCLE,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
SECONDARY EDUCATION,
NEW PUBLIC OFFICES,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
K.R. CIRCLE,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 002.
5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
NORTH RANGE-I, RAJAJINAGAR,
II BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 010.
6. SRI JAGADH JYOTHI
BASAVESHWARA SAHAKARA SANGHA (R)
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 010,
BY ITS SECRETARY/PRESIDENT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5;
VIDE ORDER DATED 22.06.2021 NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED
THROUGH HAND SUMMONS)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BENGALURU
VIDE ANNEXURE-AG AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order
dated 07.01.2021 (Annexure-AG) issued by the Deputy
Director Public Instructions, Bengaluru; order dated
27.08.2021 (Annexure- AJ) issued by the respondent
No.5-Block Education Officer inter-alia sought for direction
to the respondents 1 to 5 to accept the proposal sent by
the respondent-Management and to approve the
promotion of the petitioner granted on 31.08.2016
(Annexure-E).
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, the
petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher at Sri
Vishweshwaraswamy High School, Kengeri Upanagra,
Bangalore, run by a Charitable Trust. Appointment of the
petitioner was approved without aid by order dated
07.10.1987 by the respondent No.3, and as the above
Institution was brought under the provisions of grant-in-
aid, the appointment of the petitioner was approved by the
respondent-authorities with aid on 27.01.1988. It is
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
further stated in the writ petition that, the petitioner who
was working with Sri Vishweshwaraswamy High School at
Kengeri, was transferred to Basaveshwara Composite Pre-
University College, Bangalore, run by respondent No.6-
Management, as per Annexure-D to the writ petition.
Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred from the
aforementioned Composite College to Basaveshwara Boys
High School, Rajajinagar, Bangalore, and thereafter,
promoted to the post of Head Mistress, being a Senior
Most Teacher in the said high school as per order dated
31.08.2016 (Annexure-E). Respondent No.6-Management
has taken note of the petitioner's over all seniority in the
respondent No.6-Institution, sent a proposal to the
respondent-authorities on 06.03.2017 for approval. In the
meanwhile, a complaint has been lodged by an
organization with respondent No.4, challenging the
promotion the petitioner and in this connection respondent
No.4 issued impugned letter dated 07.01.2021 (Annexure-
AG) and consequential order of returning the proposal sent
by the Institution for approval of the post of the petitioner
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
as Head Mistress in the respondent-Institution. Feeling
aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has presented this
writ petition.
3. I have heard Sri Srikanth M.P., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri N.Kumar, learned
Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
respondent-State.
4. Sri M.P.Srikanth, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner contended that, the case of the petitioner
has been forwarded to the respondent-authorities as the
petitioner being a senior most teacher in the list prepared
by the respondent-Management out of its four educational
Institution and the respondent-authorities, without
approving the same, sent back the file to the respondent-
Management at the behest of complaint made by a
particular organization, is bad in law and contrary to
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. In this
regard, he refers to the observation made in letter dated
07.01.2021 (Annexure-AG) and submitted that as the post
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
of the Head Mistress is a single post, it cannot be reserved
in terms of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of R.R. Inamdar vs. State of
Karnataka and Others reported in (2020) 19 SCC
543.
5. Per contra, Sri N.Kumar, learned Additional
Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned
order passed by the respondent-authorities.
6. In the light of the submission made by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in
dispute that the petitioner is working in aided Institution
and the respondent-Institution is the competent authority
to make appointment to the said Institution. In that view
of the matter, the respondent No.4 ought to have
considered the letter of approval sent by the respondent-
Institution and pass appropriate orders without being
influenced by any letter/representation made by any
organization since, the respondent-authorities have to act
in accordance with provisions contained under Karnataka
NC: 2023:KHC:23232
WP No. 2192 of 2021
Education Act, 1983. It is made clear that, respondent
No.4 shall take decision independently without being
influenced by any such letters, being an authority under
Article 12 of Constitution of India. Taking into
consideration the approval given by the respondent-
Management, the respondent No.4 shall take decision in
the matter in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of R.R.Inamdar (supra), and
the declaration made by the Division Bench of this Court in
the case of Smt. V.G.Vijayakalskhmi, vs. Bangalore High
School and another disposed of on 16.11.1998 in
C.R.P.No.504 of 1994 and to pass appropriate orders
within outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition
is disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE
SB
