Karnataka High Court
Gangoorappa S/O Erappa Harijan vs The Under M Secretary on 13 September, 2023
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573
WP No. 105367 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 105367 OF 2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
GANGOORAPPA S/O ERAPPA HARIJAN,
AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. GUEST LECTURER,
R/O. MALAKASAMUDRA-583236,
TALUK. YELBURGA, DIST. KOPPAL.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR BALAGERIMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNDER SECRETARY,
PRIMARY & HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT. (GENERAL),
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-580001.
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
ZILLA PANCHAYAT KOPPAL,
Digitally
signed by
VISHAL
DISTRICT. KOPPAL-583233.
VISHAL NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL
NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL Date: 3. THE CHIEF LIBRARY OFFICER,
2023.09.27
11:22:33
+0530
DISTRICT LIBRARY CENTRE, KOPPAL,
DISTRICT KOPPAL-583233.
4. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT, CHIKKAMYAGERI-583236,
TAL. YELBURGA, DISTRICT. KOPPAL.
5. MUTTAPPA S/O NAGAPPA HARIJAN,
AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. LIBRARY SUPERVISOR,
R/O. MALAKASAMUDRA-583236,
TALUK. YELBURGA, DIST. KOPPAL.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MADANMOHAN .M. KHANNUR, AGA FOR R1 & R3;
SRI. SIDDAPPA .S. SAJJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
R2 & R4 ARE SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573
WP No. 105367 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICELS 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO WRIT OF CERTIORARI
OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE FINAL SELECTION
LIST/PROCEEDING DATED 22-07-2022 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT
NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-E IN SO FOR AS THE POST OF LIBRARY
SUPERVISOR IN RESPECT OF RESPONDENT NO.4/GRAM PANCHAYAT
CHIKKMYAGERI CONCERN AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the final select list dated 22.07.2022 notified for the post of Library Supervisor of the 4th respondent - Gram Panchayat and consequential reliefs sought is to consider his case for appointment to the post of Library Supervisor owing to his eligibility.
2. Heard the learned counsel Shri Vijaya Kumar Balagerimath appearing for the petitioner; learned AGA Shri M.M. Khannur appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3; & learned counsel Shri Siddappa Sajjan appearing for respondent No.5.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022
3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:
The 2nd respondent - Zilla Panchayat, Koppal issues a notification calling for the applications from the eligible candidates for the post of Library Supervisor. The petitioner and the 5th respondent both finding themselves eligible in terms of the said notification apply. The petitioner is not selected, while the 5th respondent comes to be selected, to the post of Library Supervisor and has been offered appointment. It is averred that he is working since then. The selection of the 5th respondent in ignorance of the claim of the petitioner, is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is more meritorious than the 5th respondent - selected candidate, he has been chosen only on the score that he has experience, of more than ten years of working in National Literacy Mission. He would submit that the notification nowhere indicates such preference.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022
5. Learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent - selectee would submit that he has been selected in terms of the preference that was available in the notification and no fault can be found to the said selection as he does have more than ten years of experience of working in the National Literacy Mission which is necessary for the appointment to the post of Library Supervisor.
6. Learned AGA while taking this Court through the documents appended to the petition would submit that the selection of the 5th respondent cannot be found fault with, he has already reported to duty and is working since then and at this juncture should not be disturbed. He would submit that all necessary provisions of law are considered and is appointed.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective counsel and have perused the material on record. -5-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022
8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. A notification comes to be issued calling for the applications from the eligible candidates by the 2nd respondent on 17.06.2022. The notification is for the appointment to the post of Library Supervisor and the post is reserved for Scheduled Caste. The condition stipulated in the notification reads as follows:
-: ಷರ ಗ :-
1. ಅಭ ಎ .ಎ .ಎ . ಪ ೕ ಯ
ಉ ೕಣ ರತಕ! "# ,
2. ಅಭ ಸ% &ೕಯ '( ಮ *+, -. ಯ
- / ರ01. ( 23ೕಕರಣ ಪತ( ಲಗ ರ01.
ಸ% &ಯ ಮತ5ರರ ಉದ7 ತ 8ಗ ಲ9ತ ರ01.
3. :ಗ;ಪ3ಸ<ಗದ =ೕಸ< > ಒಳಪAವ ಅಭ
Cತ( ಅD ಯEF ಸ ಸಲತಕ! "# .
4. ಭ C3ದ ಅD ಗಳEF Gಕ 5ಖ<
ಎ .ಎ .ಎ . ಅಂಕಪJK , J. . =ೕಸ<
ಪ( Cಣ ಪತ( - 2Lೕಕರಣ ಪತ( ಅಂಗMಕಲN
(ಇದ# ) 23ೕಕರಣ ಪತ( PQ ಇ:F ತರ M5 ಹ N S T (ಇದ# ) 5ಖU ಇV ;ಗWಂ;> '( ಮ *+ಯ ಯ Xಯ ದY ಗ&> ಸ /Z".
5. [ಂ"ವ YTಣ \ಂದ( ದ Xಯ :ವ ]/ ದ# ಅD ಸ ದ ತಪ^ _ -6- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022 ಅD `ಂ;> [ಂ"ವ YTಣ \ಂದ( ದ 23ೕಕರಣ ಪತ( ಸ /Z" ತ.^ ದ ಅD ಪ ಗa/Z;ಲ b( ೕರಕ cೕಸK d ಅನf ,/ತ _.
6. ಅD ಗಳEF ಕgh ಯವ '( ಮ *+, ಕi [jಂತರ ಸ ಸ Gk _.
7. ಗಂ ಲಯ ನದ ತರ ಪ ದವ ಅದ ೕಡ ತಕ ! .
8. ವ`ೕ= ಅD ಗಳEF f ೕಕ ಸl :ಗ; ಪ3 ದ mnಯ ;oಂಕp" ಅಭ 18 ವಷ ವಯಸq EF rs ರZಕ! "# PQ ಗ ಷt ವ`ೕ= ಈ &v ರತಕ! "# .
ಎ) wCನ ವಗ -> 35 ವಷ
x) 2ಎ, ಎx, 3ಎ, 3x -> 36 ವಷ
) ಪ.y /ಪ.*ಗಡ/ಪ( ವಗ 1 -> 40 ವಷ
9. ಅD ನ{nಯEF ಕgh ಯ- |ರಳ}~
C3 ಭ C3 ಕ ]ಸl Gk _."
9. The notification results in the appointment of the 5th respondent. The appointment of the 5th respondent drives the petitioner to this Court. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is more meritorious than the 5th respondent. The merit of the petitioner qua the 5th respondent is as follows:
-7-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022 PÀæ.¸ÀA. C§åyðUÀ¼À d£Àä J¸ï.J¸ï. ±ÉÃPÀqÁªÁgÀÄ eÁw µÀgÁ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ J¯ï.¹ % CAPÀUÀ¼ÀÄ xxxxxxx
5. ²æà 01.06.1988 291 46.56% ªÀiÁzÀgÀ 2005 jAzÀ 16.05.2013 gÀ ªÀgÉUÉ UÉÆÃAUÀÄgÀ¥Àà "K¸ï.¹.
K¸ï.¹."
K¸ï.¹. ¥ÉæÃgÀPÀgÁV PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀð»¹zÁÝgÉAzÀÄ vÀAzÉ FgÀ¥Àà vÁ®ÆPÁ ¯ÉÆÃPÀ ²PÀët ¸À«Äw ºÀjd£À AiÀÄ®§ÄUÀð EªÀgÀÄ ¸ÉêÁ zsÀÈrÃPÀgÀt ¥ÀvÀæ ¤ÃrzÁÝgÉ.
xxxxxxx
9. ²æà ªÀÄÄvÀÛ¥Àà 01.06.1985 237 37.92% »AzÀÄ [ಂ"ವ YTಣ vÀAzÉ £ÁUÀ¥Àà ªÀiÁ¢UÀ b( ೕರಕ- Xಯ ºÀjd£À (SC) :ವ ]/ •ವವರEF ಕgh ಯ-
€ f +ರಕರ •_# >
‚ಮX Cಡl
ಆ„ಶ ಇ•Zದ ಂದ
‚ಮX 2008 ಂದ
2010ರವ†> [ಂ"ವ
YTಣ \ಂದ( ದ
ಸಹb( ೕರಕ 2010 ಂದ
2018 ರವ†> wTರV
b( ೕರಕ†ಂ" ‡ರವ ಧನ
ಆ‰ರದ 2018-19 ‚
w ನ wTರV
Xಯ ಕ( ಮದ
Cಗ ದಶ ಕ• ಎಂ"
Xಯ :ವ ]/
•9V † ಎಂ" ಈ
{ಲಕ
2Lೕಕ ಸ< _
10. The petitioner in terms of the final select list secures 46.56 marks and the selected candidate i.e., 5th -8- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022 respondent secures 37.92 marks and even then the 5th respondent is selected.
11. The selection is on the solitary ground that he has more than 10 years of experience of working in a National Literacy Mission, which according to the respondent state was more preferable than the petitioner. This is defended owing to a particular condition in the notification for recruitment the condition would be that candidates who have more experience of working in National literacy Mission would be preferred. Therefore it is a preference. It is trite law that reference can be given in a recruitment process to candidates only when they are equal in merit or all other credentials preference cannot outweigh merit or merit cannot be placed in the oblivion only on the ground that a particular candidate is more preferable. In the case at hand there is vast difference between the marks secured by the selected candidate and the petitioner the difference is close to 8%. When this huge difference the fifth respondent could not have been -9- NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022 selected only on the ground that he had better experience and better experience was preferred.
12. On this solitary ground of the petitioner being more meritorious and the selection to be on the basis of merit the selection of the fifth respondent is rendered unsustainable. Therefore it is for the state to now complete the selection process from the stage at which defect is observed bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order.
13. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The selection and appointment of the fifth respondent is quashed.
(iii) If the petitioner is found to be more meritorious than all the candidates in the select list, he shall be offered such appointment.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:10573 WP No. 105367 of 2022
(iv) Till the selection process is complete in terms of the directions (supra), the fifth respondent was now join duties and whose appointment is made subject to the result of the present petition shall not be terminated.
(v) The selection process as directed shall be completed within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, if not earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vnp*/ct:bck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69