Karnataka High Court
Dr G V Venkataramana vs Dr G Vishwanath on 3 June, 2008
' " :V ' G,Vish:I§:§nath
xx ms men cozmr ore KARNATAKA A1' ~ V,
HATED mxs mg 3rd DAY or' Jam 2902:: ..: A "
PRESEKT
THE Honrnw. xsmcsmxac JGSEPfi,. J§;fis{T%cg'"
'THE HOPPBLE Mmavsugm AfVrz;1? g1§ficx9p,§.i.;as*sou}nA
Writ Aggeal Ho@5137'=a3_jg:)45'6V:§:§i3§_§_1
Between:
D1". (}.V.Ve;11{afararné'::1ai'Afi = '
Age: 36 years " h .
Lecturer in Bioefifechnfiiégy , V
Department of Bi{3'~T.tjif:h31<i?':i<5'g\»" ' ~ . «V
V.V.Pumm C!<':}1lc:g<:- officiaxice
K.R.R0a:;i, Bazigaiort '
Presttxxtiy Woridnsg as . ,
Lecturér in Envi1t5i2.1nf::nta¥._ Sciemze
Deparhnen: 'of E11vimn_menta1' Science
Manasagrfiigotri, Mysore' Unixrersity
Mgzsorc .--¢~& ()6 .. Apgaefiant
(By and Sri Thimmanna, Advocate)
A 1,;d:
'S30 (':3-ngabai1"aiah
<Age;i<ab($'ut 38 years
Mair: 3:, 5, P.W.fl.
'=.Qua;ft::rs (MP)
' " Layout
v. fiangalom - 96
'V -- 4:15' ieemed Single Judge until further orders.
2. The Registrar
Manasagangotri
Mysore University
Mysore
3. TheChairman
Boaxd ofAppoi:1t;1:I1eI1t » _
For seiection and appaéntmen: '
For Lecturer in Envimnmenta} = - -
Science, Myeore __ .. Respoynidents
(By Sri T.P.Raje11dzakumar smglgay,'-.Adi;x_»¢at;:'Ve£5: .R-2 and R--3, M/5
Panc:hajaJ::ya.A$socia1:es, Advocatee far (';/ V
This Writ ap1:2ea;1,.:e¢n;ni1§:g ufii'..~:forVAét§i1::i$.siVgf31:i on this day, the
Court delivered the 'fo11<§§2i;1g;4« V f
V be v'g_i;I;_§e;1s:.3én;1§;*;_~ T; V'
CYRIAC J OSEPH .A .
1.. This ap1;§e;a}' against the j'udg13}en'{ dated
05.09.2005 'wet eaeeoxx No. 31549 of 2004 which was
¥e:;x:,;'t1ié:A]eé3.#j;eci Judge settmg aside Anz1ex1:Ie-J orcier
of of the 3rd xeepondent in Writ petition. The
é:ppe1}2'a:Am::_Vis sVt3i3e';: respondeni in the Writ petition and the 1*'
-. j;r:ef;ondent"};eiei12 was the Wtitioner in the writ pefifion.
admitting the writ. appeal on 1'?'.10.2GO6, an izltexim
~Ve9rt1.erVi§e*as passed staying the operation. of the impugned order of
ta. page hfitzfi iIIZ1f)I"<:3SS€d by the fact. that the Writ petitioner
' " " hagi :i:;ua1ificati-311 of Postgraduate Degree and Ph.D. in
Science: and aisc that the writ petitioner is a
The appointee was required to give an unciertaizhag 3
that he unéztrstaoé that the post was purely
contractua} basis as per the UGC X31 PLa1iA'V!3s}3ot;fa §.03i;j%L." V
Deveiopment assistance to the Univexsiiy ,_
tcrmixms 'Wi1'.h the Xth Plan period " L'
T116 said appointrncnt of the the fuxst
respondent in W.P.N0.31549'['.'#€.iG4;-- Single Judge
allowed the wrif. pt:t1'tiQ;1" a__11d. of the mad respondent in on 05.99.2006.
The lcarneé 1 anti 2 in the Wliii pctiiioniigo »ubc'::~.fi:«1:'tiide1ti1re of the writ petitioner and '£0 appoint 'vtd thé Vp<V)ét uf'. in Environmental Science forthwith. ' ;A"ggrievéd"~?}j5?"ti1c fixdér of tlzc learned Singie dutige, the \x?:xv;i£«})ctiti0n has filed this appeal.
5. writ petition, the lcameé Single Judge disabled person. it is true that Annexure-E Notification the reievanf subfeaf from an Indian Uraizxersify or c;2?iiW. equivaient degree froma Foreign University." J i Tho disputs is with regard to the mganbing of a 'relevant subjcci'. Acconiing to {"116 Writ' 'nzzktvant sixbject' in this case means @116 stxbject o1"iVEi;vi:=QQ1€:o:1ta}. V L' Science. According to 'relevant :-subject.' includes any one it sxlbjoctsi According to tho subjects are Botany, Zooiogggflfl Ezivizonmental Science, Gfrogxaphy, In other Words, it is contended tiiai fi'c1..1€T€'3I} Postgraduatzi Dogma: and Phi}. in any oiVfi;e._Voi'. __ 8ii}.{T5iVi'i.i'~'iiV}iI1CI1tiO11f:d subjects is eiigiblo for IV1v'f3(2tv.1L1i¥'iEZi".i.I'1..'I7:'}31V}',It)I1}I}€I1'iEl]. Science. 'Aiii:3.§X111t--E Notification should have been more clearii giving any room for ambiguity and regarding qualifinzzation. It is to be notcd Notification mentions the 'relevant subject' and 'siibjoct. concemcd'. If {he expression was 'subject iiioogiticrricd' possibly there was no mvozfu for ambiguity. Whon the i""¢V:o5<"1:i1*essi0I1 is 'relevant suh;'cct', it has given mom for different 9'' pointeé out that the above fact is admitted in the statement of - objections filed by the University. It is also to be noied th>:§f'.me Board of Appointments also pmxtreeded on the if Candidate for appeiniment as Lecturer in Envixonnugeiitsil ii is required to possess Postgraduate and <,;1:iy"' efie' of {he i31'teIdiscipIi11ary subjects mentioned a1iiQ}re';.V_.
8. In View of the ambiguity Ari3:ie:»iI1re~E Notification regartiing quaiififgéfiiexg of practice foiiowed by the Univereigr all of the View taken by an expert; flgipoixztments that Postgraduate degfee of the interdisciplinary subjects the post of Lecturer in View that the appointxnent given to the ?3PP€ii9flt'vS1ii)}1i{i~.,§i(}i~'iiIi1aV€3 been disturbed and that the of Si:iig1e.._gI11:1ge is liable to be set aside. learned Single Judge: is set aside. Writ petition V'
9. dismfisscd.
Hence the «wit appca} is allowfid. The impuglaed {)I'd(3£.*:.'-'if the %SdX.%%T & Chéeéiusfica