Karnataka High Court
V N Upendra Kumar vs Karnataka State Road on 11 April, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 KAR 2052
Author: L.Narayana Swamy
Bench: L. Narayana Swamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY
WRIT PETITION NO.56619 OF 2013 (S-KSRTC)
BETWEEN:
V N UPENDRA KUMAR
S/O C NARASAIAH
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
WORKING AS JUNIOR ASSISTANT (17/1),
DEPOT NO. 37, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
KENGERI, BANGALORE & R/AT NO.3
3RD CROSS ROAD, K R BADAVANE
MADHUGIRI - 573 132
TUMKUR DISTRICT ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.NAGA PRASANNA M, ADV.)
AND:
KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
CENTRAL OFFICE,
K H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 027
REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.SHWETHA ANAND, ADV.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT/CORPORATION TO APPOINT THE PETITIONER AS
2
SYSTEM SUPERVISOR (CLASS-III) UNDER GENERAL CATEGORY
IN TERMS OF SELECTION COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT
TO NOTIFICATION NO.1/2013 DTD.15.2.2013 (UNDER ANNEX-C
TO THE W.P.) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT/CORPORATION
FROM THE DATE ON WHICH ONE SRI.NARAYANASWAMY P.M
WAS APPOINTED AS SYSTEM SUPERVISOR (CLASS-III) AND
GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
ORDER THIS DAY AFTER HAVING HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
ORDER ON 14.03.2018 , THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the respondent-corporation to appoint the petitioner as a System Supervisor (Class-III) in terms of the selection committee proceedings pursuant to Notification No.1/2013 dated 15.02.2013 from the date on which Sri Narayanaswamy P.M. was appointed as System Supervisor (Class-III) and to grant all consequential benefits.
2. The facts of the case are that by a Notification dated 15.2.2013 in No.1/2013 the respondent - Corporation notified 12 posts of System Supervisors (Class-III) in terms of Cadre and Recruitment Rules, 1982 and in terms of In-Service 3 Recruitment for Class-III Supervisory Posts Scheme, 2009. The petitioner applied to the post enclosing his degree certificate for having passed B.Sc., in Computer Science. On scrutiny of the applications and on physical examination of the petitioner, the petitioner was declared to be eligible by a communication dated 27.8.2013. After assessment of the petitioner and others, all the candidates who appeared for the said recruitment were short listed for documents verification. In the said list, the name of the petitioner figured at Sl.No.10 but in the remarks column his name was omitted for documents verification. The petitioner made representation on 11.07.2013. Thereafter, the Corporation by communication dated 19.08.2013 short listed the name of the petitioner for documents verification also. However, in the provisional select list notified on 01.10.2013 the name of the petitioner was omitted and name of Sri Narayanaswamy P.M was appeared who had never participated in the selection process pursuant to Notification No.1/2013. Later Sri Narayana Swamy P M has reported for duty as Systems Supervisor (Class-III) under category reserved for Scheduled Caste and candidature of the petitioner is still to be considered by the respondent - 4 Corporation. Hence, it seems, the petitioner has not challenged the appointment of Sri Narayana Swamy P M, but sought for direction to his appointment based on his eligibility as per the proceedings of the Selection Committee.
3. The respondent - Corporation has filed statement of objections. It is stated that there were in all 11 in-service candidates for 12 notified posts including the petitioner and Sri Narayana Swamy. It is stated that educational qualification for the post of Systems Supervisor Class-III is a degree in Computer Science/Application from a University established by law or equivalent qualification. The petitioner possessed a Bachelor Degree in Science & studied Computer Science as one of the optional subjects along with Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics, which is not a prescribed educational qualification for the post of System Supervisor. Therefore, the Selection Committee did not consider the educational qualification possessed by the petitioner and Sri Anand Prasad, which is a Bachelor Degree in Science & studied Computer Science as one of the optional subjects. In the common merit list, the name of 5 Sri P M Narayana Swamy was left out and after representation by him, his name was included. Accordingly, he was called for verification of original documents along with 9 other candidates on 20.7.2013 who possessed a degree in Computer Application and appointed. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent - Corporation and perused the writ petition papers.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an illegality on the part of the respondent - Corporation in ignoring petitioner from selection and appointment to the post of System Supervisor Class-III though his educational qualification B Sc., Computer Science is an equivalent qualification. In this regard, the learned counsel placed reliance on the Circular No.1345 dated 13.6.2006 issued by the respondent - Corporation itself and also the information gathered from various Universities such as, Davangere University, Tumakuru University, Vijayanagar Sri Krishnadevaraya University and 6 Bengaluru University, to which reference would be made, in the later portion of this order. It is the submission of the petitioner that he is entitled to be appointed from the date Sri Narayanaswamy P M was appointed with all consequential benefits.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the qualification possessed by the petitioner i.e., B Sc., with Computer Science as one of the optional subject is not an equivalent qualification to the post of System Supervisor Class- III and therefore she sought to justify action of the respondent in ignoring petitioner from appointment to the said post.
7. The petitioner in the present writ petition has not challenged the selection and appointment of Sri Narayana Swamy P.M. to the post of System Supervisor Class-III. While it is the contention of the petitioner that Sri Narayana Swamy P M was not at all the candidate pursuant to the Notification No.1/2013, it is the contention of the respondent - Corporation that he was, and on the objection made by him, the name of Sri Narayana Swamy P M came to be included in the Merit List and 7 since he possessed the requisite qualification, Degree in Computer Application, he was appointed. However, this controversy need not be gone into in the present writ petition as there is no challenge to the selection and appointment of Sri Narayana Swamy P M.
8. Next to be examined is, whether B Sc., with Computer Science as one of the subjects, is an equivalent qualification to the post of System Supervisor Class-III. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon Circular dated 13.6.2006 in No.1345 issued by the Respondent, in which, it is ordered to appoint persons with B Sc., Computer Science to the post of Program Administrator Class-III. The petitioner has also sought for clarification from different Universities as to the equivalent qualification to Computer Science. The information furnished by Davangere University is to the effect that in their colleges, the B Sc., degree is being taught with the following combinations in addition to two languages:
a) Biochemistry/Microbiology/Computer Science.
b) Chemistry/Mathematics/Computer Science,
c) Computer Science/Mathematics/Statistics, 8
d) Physics/Mathematics/Computer Science,
e) Physics/Mathematics/Statistics,
f) Physics/Chemistry/Computer Science
g) Physics/Electronics/Computer Science.
The Tumakuru University has furnished information as to the clarification sought as to which are all the equivalent qualifications to computer science, to the effect that B C A and such other degrees are equivalent qualifications and in their colleges, computer science is being taught with following combinations:
B.A - History, Economics, Computer Science B.A - History, Geography, Computer Science, B.Sc - Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science B.Sc - Electronics, Mathematics, Computer Science, B.Com. (Computer Science).
To the same clarification, Vijayanagar Sri Krishnadevaraya University, has furnished information that in their colleges, B Sc., Computer Science is taught with Physics, Mathematics and Computer Science subjects.9
The petitioner also sought for clarification from Bengaluru University as to whether B Sc., degree with Computer Science, Mathematics, Statistics or Computer Science, Mathematics and Physics as optional subjects is equivalent to degree in Computer Science, it is stated that to obtain degree in B Sc., Computer Science, in addition to two languages study with the above either of the two options, is an equivalent qualification.
9. From perusal of the above information furnished by the above Universities coupled with the Circular issued by the respondent Corporation itself dated13.6.2006, it is clear that the qualification possessed by the petitioner namely, B Sc., with Computer Science, Mathematics and Statistics as optional subjects is the equivalent qualification to Computer Science/Application. Therefore, the contention of the respondent corporation that qualification possessed by the petitioner is not an equivalent qualification to the post of System Supervisor Class-III cannot be accepted. The respondent corporation has ignored the petitioner from selection and appointment to the post of System Supervisor Class-III on the solitary ground that 10 he did not possess the equivalent qualification. The said contention of the respondent corporation is not substantiated by producing any such information gathered either from the University or any competent authorities. On the other hand, the information gathered by the petitioner which is mentioned as above, makes it clear that the qualification possessed by the petitioner is an equivalent qualification to the said post. The petitioner ought to have been appointed along with Sri Narayana Swamy P M to the post of System Supervisor Class-III.
10. In the circumstances, petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for in the present writ petition. He is entitled to be appointed to the post of System Supervisor Class-III from the date on which Sri Narayana Swamy P M was appointed not in his place but a vacant post and he is entitled to all consequential benefits.
Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. The respondent - corporation is directed to appoint the petitioner to the post of System Supervisor Class-III pursuant to Notification No.1/2013 11 dated 15.2.2013 from the date Sri Narayana Swamy P M was appointed with all consequential benefits.
Sd/-
JUDGE akd