DR.H.K.S.SWAMY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

( By SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADV., ) AND :

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT. DEPT. OF HEALTH & FAMILY (MEDICAL EDUCATION) DEPT. BANGALORE-560001.

THE PRESIDENT SJM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY CHITRADURGA.

AICTE SOUTH WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE P.K.BLOCK, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-09. 2

RAJEEV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES JAYANAGAR 4TH BLOCK BANGALORE. BY ITS REGISTRAR.

DR.BHARATHI OCCUPATION: PROFESSOR SJM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY CHITRADURGA. ...RESPONDENTS (SRI.N.K.RAMESH, ADV., FOR R4, & SRI.M.P.SRIKANTH, ADV., FOR R2 & R5) *** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE APPOINTMENT OF THE R5 AS PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE BY THE R2 VIDE NO.SJM/1274/08-09 DT.16.1.09 VIDE ANNX-B. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 16.01.2009 Annexure-D and order dated 12.07.2011 Annexure-E. 3

2. The petitioner contends that he is senior most professor in the second respondent college and eligible to be promoted as Principal. Ignoring the seniority of petitioner, second respondent passed the impugned order, Annexure-B promoting the fifth respondent as the Principal. Aggrieved by the impugned order at Annexure-B the petitioner filed review petition before the first respondent. The review petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed on the ground that, the petitioner kept quite when his junior by name Jagadish was promoted as the Principal. Hence this writ petition.

3. Heard, arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.

4. Merely because the petitioner kept silent when his junior by name Jagadish was promoted as Principal in no ground to reject the claim of the petitioner. Fifth respondent may be qualified to be 4 promoted as Principal but whether she is junior or senior to the petitioner is required to be examined. The main grievance of the petitioner is that, he is senior most professor in the second respondent college and eligible to be appointed as Principal. This grievance of the petitioner is not at all examined in the impugned order. On this ground the impugned order is liable to be quashed. For the reasons stated above the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is partly allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 12.07.2011, Annexure-E passed by the respondent is hereby quashed. iii) The matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh disposal in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, in an 5 event not later than three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE HR/SM