Karnataka High Court
Smt. H .N Kavitha vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 March, 2013
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, Ravi Malimath
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
ON THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2013
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
WRIT APPEAL NO.391 OF 2012(S-PRO)
BETWEEN:
Smt.H.N.Kavitha
Aged about 35 years
W/o Sri Raghunath
Gowdagere Street,
Karkanpet,
Chikballapur Town,
Kolar District. ...APPELLANT
(By Sri Guruprasad B.R, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
Department of Education,
(Technical Education)
2
M.S.Building,
Dr.B.R.Ambedakar Veedhi,
Bangalore - 560 001
Represented by its Secretary.
2. The Management of
K.V.T.Polytechnic
(Grant-in-Aid institution)
New Campus,
Chikballapur Town - 562 101
Kolar District.
3. Sri M.K.Srinivasan
Major,
System Analyst,
Computer Science Division,
K.V.T.Polytechnic,
Chikballapur Town,
Kolar District. ...RESPONDENTS
(By Smt.M.C.Nagashree, HCGP)
*****
This Writ Appeal filed under Section 4 of the
Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order
passed in writ petition No.18518/2006(S-PRO) dated
08.08.2011.
This Writ Appeal coming on for preliminary
hearing this day, K.L.Manjunath J., delivered the
following:-
3
JUDGMENT
The legality and correctness of the order passed by the Learned Single Judge on 08.08.2011, in W.P. No.18518/2006 is called in question in this appeal.
2. The appellant was working in the second respondent - institution as a Computer Programmer. Initially, she was appointed on temporary basis and her services was continued without any interruption and the appellant had served the second respondent - institution for over a period of eight years as a computer programmer.
3. The second respondent - institution has been admitted to grant-in-aid w.e.f. from 05.02.2001. The third respondent has been appointed as System Analyst in the year 2003 and that the post of the third respondent is approved as System Analyst, even though the appellant was senior to the third respondent. The 4 same was challenged by the appellant by filing a writ petition.
4. The Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the appellant is no more in the service of the second respondent - institution and that she has joined the Government service as Mechanic in the Government Polytechnic, Bagepalli w.e.f. 31.01.2008. Therefore, the writ petition came to be dismissed as having become infructuous. This order is called in question in this writ appeal.
5. It is contended by the appellant's counsel that if the case of the petitioner had been considered by the Learned Single Judge and that the appointment of the appellant under the second respondent had been approved with effect from the date of appointment in the second respondent, the appellant is prepared to resign the present post of Mechanic in the Government 5 Polytechnic College, Bagepalli. Therefore, he requests to set-aside the order of the Learned Single Judge and remand the matter back to the Learned Single Judge.
6. During the course of the arguments, it is brought to our notice that the appellant's services has been terminated by the second respondent long back and that she has raised a dispute challenging the order of termination. If the appellant is no more in the services of the second respondent - institution, the question of considering the seniority of the appellant with that of the third respondent does not arise for consideration. On account of subsequent developments i.e., the dismissal of her services by the second respondent and the appellant joining the Government Polytechnic College as a mechanic and working in Bagepalli.
6
Even if we hold that the appellant is senior to the third respondent, no purpose would be served as the appellant is no more in the service of the second respondent - institution.
7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE JJ