Karnataka High Court
Dr.C.S.Patil vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 December, 2013
Author: H.G.Ramesh
Bench: H.G.Ramesh
-1-
W.P.No.47152/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO.47152/2013 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR. C.S.PATIL
S/O SHIVARUDRAPPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
WORKING AS DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA STATE SERICULTURE RESEARCH
& DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
TALAGHATTAPURA, KANAKAPURA ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 062 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI M S BHAGWAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE (SERICULTURE)
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001
2. COMMISSIONER FOR SERICULTURE
DEVELOPMENT & DIRECTOR OF SERICULTURE
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, 5TH FLOOR
M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001
3. KARNATAKA STATE SERICULTURE
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
TALAGHATTAPURA, KANAKAPURA ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 062 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAVIVERMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W
SMT. RAFEEUNISA, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2;
SRI K G SHANTHAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3;
SRI M N PRASANNA, ADVOCATE FOR
IMPLEADING APPLICANT IN IA I/13)
-2-
W.P.No.47152/2013
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):
By consent of learned counsel on both sides, the writ petition is heard on merits and is being disposed of by this order.
2. In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as Director of Karnataka State Sericulture Research & Development Institute (R3), is seeking for a writ of mandamus to the respondents to continue him in the post of Director till completion of his tenure of 5 years i.e. till 06.11.2017.
3. The only question that requires to be considered in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner has a tenure of 5 years to continue as Director of the Institute till 06.11.2017 ?
-3-W.P.No.47152/2013
4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as the Director of respondent no.3-Institute as per the notification dated 7.11.2012 (Annexure-J). The notification states that his tenure is till the age of superannuation or till further orders, whichever is earlier. The Government Order dated 4.1.2013 (Annexure-J1) also states that the petitioner is appointed as Director of respondent no.3-Institute up to attaining the age of superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
5. The sole contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the tenure of the petitioner as Director in respondent no.3-Institute is governed by Rule 14 of the Karnataka State Sericulture Development Institute Rules and Regulations, 1980 ('the Rules' for short). The Rules are produced at Annexure-D. Rule 14 of the Rules reads as follows:
"14. APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTOR:-
1. The appointment of Director including first Director shall always be made by the Government and such appointment shall be for a period of five years.-4- W.P.No.47152/2013
2. The Director shall be in overall administrative control and management of the Institute."
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in support of the writ petition, relied on a judgment of this Court in Dr.G.Kamalapurkar v. Dr. Venugopal Ram Rao [2001(3) KAR.L.J. 467]. He also referred to the following judgments in support of the writ petition:
1. L.P.Agarwal v. Union of India [(1992)3 SCC 526]
2. Dr. S.K.Kacker v. A.I.I.M.S. [1996(5) SLR 699]
3. P.Venugopal v. Union of India [(2008)5 SCC 1]
6. However, learned Advocate General appearing for respondent nos.1 & 2, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.3 and the learned counsel appearing for the applicant in I.A.No.1/2013 submit that the question raised herein is answered against the petitioner by this Court in the order dated 27.07.2012 passed in W.P.No.8085/2008 c/w W.P.No.15880/2007 (Annexure- R4). One of the questions that fell for consideration in the said matter reads as follows:
"(2) Whether the appointment of Director to the third respondent Institute is governed by the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations, 1997 or is it by any other Rules/Regulations?"-5- W.P.No.47152/2013
The above question is answered at para 47 of the order :
" 47. In that view of the matter I am of the considered view that Point No.2 has to be held by concluding that appointment to the post of Director of third respondent-institute is governed by C & R, 1997 by the mode prescribed namely to be made by the State Government by considering the recommendation of the Selection Committee."
(Underlining supplied)
7. In view of the above order of this Court holding that the Karnataka State Sericulture Research and Development Institute Cadre & Recruitment Regulations, 1997 ('the Regulations of 1997' for short) govern the appointment of the Director, it is unnecessary to examine the contention urged by the learned Advocate General that Rule 14 of the Rules is repealed by Regulation No.34 of the Regulations of 1997. Accordingly, the matter requires to be examined in the light of the Regulations of 1997. Regulation No.8 of the Regulations of 1997 states that the age of superannuation of the employees of the Institute is as prescribed by the State Government for its employees from time to time. Admittedly, the age of superannuation for -6- W.P.No.47152/2013 the employees of Government of Karnataka is 60 years. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, submits that 'Employee' defined in the Regulations of 1997 would not include the Director. I am unable to accept the submission in view of Regulation No.2(9) of the Regulations of 1997 which states that Employee means any person in the service of the Institute as per the defined cadre strength. The defined cadre strength includes Director. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has already completed 60 years. Hence, the petitioner has no legal right to continue in the post of Director. Even otherwise, as per the appointment order at Annexure-J, the tenure of the petitioner's appointment as Director in respondent no.3-Institute is till he attains the age of superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier. As stated above, the age of superannuation for employees in Government of Karnataka is 60 years. Accordingly, the petitioner has no legal right to continue in the post of Director.
8. In my opinion, the judgment in Dr.G.Kamalapurkar was rendered in the context of the Rules, Regulations and -7- W.P.No.47152/2013 Bye-laws of Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology and hence, it is not applicable to the present case. Similarly, as the question raised herein is directly covered by the order of this Court referred to above, the other judgments relied on by the petitioner's counsel also have no application to this case.
9. In view of the above, I reject the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has a tenure of 5 years as Director. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, no order need be passed on I.A.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013; they stand disposed of accordingly.
Petition dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.