Karnataka High Court
Sri. Kandul Venkatareddy S/O K. Ram ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2011
Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar, Ravi Malimath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CiRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 8T DAY OP DECEMBER 2011
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN SHANTANAGOUDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
\V R IT APPEAL N o .79/Q1L[I
BETWEEN:
Sri Kandul Venkatareddv,
S/o K. Ram Krishna Reddy,
Age: 47 years, 0cc.: Asst. Engineer
(Agriculture), r,' o House No. 38,
Kumareshwar Nagar, Dharwad.
Appellant
By Shri Sriharsha A. Neelopant. Advocatel
AND:
The State of Karnataka
Represented by its
Principal Secretary.
Department of Agriculture 8
Horticulture, M.S. Building,
Bangalore.
2. The Vice Chancellor,
University of Agricultural
Sciences. Dharwad.
3. The Registrar,
University of Agricultural
Sciences, Dharxvad.
- Respondents
(By Sri C.S. Patil, A.G.A. for RI to R3)
.7.
This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the
Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the
impugned order dated 06.07.2011 passed in W.P. No.
67649/2010 (S-RES) and allow the W.P. No.
67649/2010 (S-RES) as prayed for.
This Appeal coming on for orders this day, Mohan
Shantanagoudar .1. delivered the following: -
JUDGMENT
1. The order dawd 06.07.2011 in V.P. No. 67649/2010 (S-TR) is called in question in this Writ Appeal.
2. The appellant is working as a Assistant Engineer in University of Agricultural Sciences. Raichur. He wanted his transfer from the University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur to University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Accordingly he made a representation before the State Government. The State Government permitted the transfer. Accordingly the University of gricukural Sciences, Raichur has relieved the appellant for joining duties to University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.
with effect from 16.09.2010. After getting the relieving order the appellant approached the third respondent-
:3:University for posting. The third respondent-University did not have the vacant post of Assistant Engineer and consequently the appellant could not join duties with the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. At that point of time the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. No. 64649/2010 praying for a direction to the respondents permitting him to report for duty as per the order passed by the Government dated 23.03.20 10 and disposed of the writ petition with the following directions.
'i) The Government is directed to reconsider the request of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for the creation of a supernumerary post in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Agriculture) in the services of UAS, Dharwad.
ii) If any post in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Agriculture) falls vacant in the near future in the services of the UAS, Dharwad, the case of the petitioner for giving effect to his transfer shall be considered first.
iii) If the Government finds it not feasible to give permission to create a supernumerary :4 post and if no post of the Assistant Engineer Agriculture1 is likely to frill vacant shonly. then the Governm ent shall act in accordance with law to ha ve the petitioner sent back to the UAS. Raichur' .
3. We do not find any error in the impugned order in as much as the impugned order is perfectly justified in the facts and circumstanc es of the case. If there is no vacant post of Assistant Engineer in the University of A&ricultural Sciences. D hanvad, the petitione r/ appellant herein cannot compel the University at Dharwad to give him posti ng. The posting will be giv en onl5 if there is a vaca nç. Practically the State Government is at fault in permitting transfer of the petitioner/appellant here in to the University at Dhanvad in as much as it should have first enqu ired with the University at Dharwad to find out as to whether there is vacant post of Assistant Engineer or not. Because of the fault of the State Government.
the third respondent cannot be made to suffer. In the normal course the writ petition could have be en .c.
dismissed but the learned Single Judge by taking a sympathetic view in the matter has dispose d of the writ petition ith the aforementioned direction. The impugned order is just and proper. No interference is called for in this appeal. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed.
Sd! TUDGE Sd/.
JUDGE bvv