Karnataka High Court
Sreevani B vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 December, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 106797 OF 2019 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SREEVANI B.
AGE: 26 OCC: PART TIME LECTURER
R/O WARD NO.3 BELLARY
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A. MALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
Digitally signed by DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
VISHAL NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE.
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad
2. VICE CHANCELLOR
VIJAYANAGAR SRIKRISHNA
DEVARAYA UNIVERSITY,
JANA SAGAR CAMPUS
BELLARI
3. THE REGISTRAR
VIJAYANAGAR SRIKRISHNA
DEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, BALLARI
JANA SAGAR CAMPUS
VINAYAK NAGAR
CANTONMENT BELLARI
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
4. M. SIDDESHWARI
D/O BASAVARAJA MYAGERI
AGE APPROX 30 YEARS OCC: SERVICE
R/O. UKP ROAD, KARADAKAL
LINGASGUR(TQ)
RAICHUR DIST: 584122
5. DR. KAVITHA SAGAR
AGE: APPROX 29 YEARS
OCC: SERVICE
NO.505, 5TH FLOOR
DWARAKAMAI APARTMENT,
KRISHNA PLAZA
KAPPAGAL ROAD
BALLARI-583104
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADV. FOR R3,
SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV. FOR R4,
SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1,
NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH,
R5 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED OFFICE ORDERS DATED 07.09.2018 BEARING
NO.VSKUB/ADM-DPAR/2018-19/796 AND VSKUB/ADM-
DPAR/2018-19/803 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE
ANNEXURE-M AND N RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an Office Order dated 07.09.2018 issued by the respondent No.3 appointing the respondent No.4 as Assistant Professor in the Department of Botany at the respondent Vijayanagar Srikrishna Devaraya University (hereinafter referred to as the 'University' for short).
2. Facts adumbrated are as follows.
Before embarking upon the consideration of the issue on its merit, I deem it appropriate to notice the protagonist in the lis. The petitioner is an applicant to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Botany pursuant to a selection process initiated by the respondent No.2 University. So is the respondent No.4, who emerges as the selected candidate. Therefore, the lis is between the petitioner and the selected candidate.
3. Notifications are issued calling for applications from eligible candidates at various disciplines in the University. One such discipline so called was the discipline of botany which forms -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR the fulcrum of the lis. The recruitment notifications in the case at hand are not one but three in number. The first recruitment notification is 01.06.2016. The second recruitment notification was 08.08.2017. The third recruitment notification which confined itself to the vacancies arising in the area declared under Article 371J. The third recruitment notification is what is germane for the issue in the lis. Pursuant to the recruitment notification of the year 2016, the petitioner and the respondent No.4 had submitted their respective applications. Since the subsequent notifications indicated that the candidates who have already submitted the applications need not submit all over again.
4. This ostensibly was for the purpose of not demanding repeated fee from the hands of the candidates. However, it was indicated that any updated information should be given. The respondent No.4 and the petitioner participate in the selection process. The selection process resulted in withdrawal of the name of the petitioner and the respondent No.4 as being eligible to be considered for interview. The respondent No.4 and the petitioner were called for interview. Interviews were conducted. -5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR Pursuant to the interview, the result is that the petitioner is not selected and the respondent Nos.4 and 5 were selected. The selection of the respondent No.4 is what is challenged by the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Ramachandra A. Mali, appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel Sri. J.S. Shetty representing respondent No.3, Sri. Mahesh Wodeyar for respondent No.4 and the learned AGA Smt. Girija S. Hiremath for respondent No.1.
6. The learned counsel Sri. Ramachandra R. Mali appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend taking this Court through the documents appended to the petition and the documents that are produced before this Court that the selection of the respondent No.4 is marred by illegality. The respondent No.4 at the time of interview or at the time of the application that was submitted at the time of interview had already been appointed in the Forest Department of the Government. Such appointment is not divulged. Through proper channel, the applications are not updated. Permission to attend -6- NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR the interview is not granted by the competent authority through proper channel.
7. The learned counsel would further submit that no objection certificate that was necessary to attend the interview is not in place and the merit that the petitioner secured, is far higher than that of the selected candidate. The response given by the University to the petitioner in seeking information about submission of no objection certificate, runs counter to the statement of objections so filed by the University. Therefore, on all these counts, the learned counsel submits that the entire selection process of the respondent No.4 is laced with mala fides and arbitrariness. Therefore, the petitioner ought to have been selected and not the respondent No.4 is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
8. The counsel for the selected candidate respondent No.4 would, however, refute every submission of the learned counsel contending that the application as on the date of the submission of the application she had not secured any employment. As on the date when she was called for interview though she was already working in the Forest Department, the -7- NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR no objection certificate was taken and was placed before the Interview Committee. The no objection certificate was granted on 03.09.2018 for the purpose of attending the interview and the resignation is submitted the next day after the order of appointment. The resignation is accepted in accordance with law and the respondent No.4 is more meritorious than that of the petitioner. Therefore, the appointment of the respondent No.4 is valid in law. He would submit that even if the petitioner is to be appointed, it cannot be against a post reserved for Scheduled Castes which the respondent No.4 is. If at all the petitioner has to be appointed, it has to be under the category 2A which she claims and therefore submits that the appointment of the respondent No.4 must not be touched but should be affirmed.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent University Sri. J.S. Shetty would though toe the lines of the counsel appearing for the selected candidate would submit that the selected candidate has been selected in accordance with law after due verification of the no objection certificate that was placed before the Interview Committee. Therefore, the petitioner is found to be more meritorious than the petitioner. Owing to the -8- NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR merit of the respondent No.4, she is selected under general merit category, as she springs to that category and the vacancy that was left of the Scheduled Caste is filled by the respondent No.5 and the petitioner has no chance of getting into those vacancies. The learned counsel submits that the interview and all other things have taken place in accordance with law.
10. The learned counsel would further submit that this Court would not sit as an appeal against the findings of the selection committee to annul the appointment of the respondent No.4. The learned counsel submits that even with regard to the applications or interview being through proper channel is also in order as the selection committee has found it to be fit. Therefore, he would seek dismissal of the petition.
11. Both the learned counsel appearing for the respondents in unison would submit that this Court would not interfere with the wisdom of the selection committee unless it is found to be arbitrary and there is no arbitrariness in the case at hand is the submission.
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
12. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
13. The issue that falls for consideration is whether the selection of the respondent No.4 is in tune with law, to which the issue needs to be considered from the date of issuance of the notification. The University issues a notification calling for applications from eligible candidates for several posts. One such post called is the post of Assistant Professor in the discipline of Botany. The first application was called on 01.06.2016, this is not in dispute. A second notification comes to be issued terming it to be a fresh recruitment notification (the second recruitment notification). This second recruitment notification or the fresh recruitment notification, clause 3 assumes significance. Clause 3 reads as follows:
"3. Candidates who had applied earlier vide VSKU Notification No.VSKUB / ADM / 2016-17 / 103, dated: 01.06.2016 and vide Notification No.: VSKUB / ADM / 2016-17 / 482, dated 24.12.2016 need not apply once again. But they will have to submit relevant information and details in the revised format in 8 (Eight) sets. However, they need not pay the above fees if it has been already paid along with earlier application form. Any / new
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR certificates for fresh claim have to be submitted in 8 sets."
14. Clause 3 indicates that the candidates who had applied earlier in terms of notification dated 01.06.2016 need not once again apply, but will have to submit relevant information and details in the revised format in eight sets. Therefore, it was not that no information should be given, but any relevant updated information should be submitted. This was on 08.08.2017.
15. The third recruitment notification comes on 14.06.2018, which is for the areas coming within the government order which implements Article 371J. All the candidates, who participated in the selection process belong to the said area which come under 371J is not in dispute. In the said notification, clause 3 again assumes significance it reads as follows.
"Recruitment Notification under Article 371(J) In accordance to Government of Karnataka Circular (GOK) No. ED 136 UNE 2017 dated 17.07.2017 related to Direct Recruitment of Teaching and Non-Teaching Posts, and the recent GOK Circular No: ED 572 UNE 2017 dated 25.5.2018 this Recruitment Notification has been issued for immediate recruitment of posts reserved for candidates under Article 371-J of the Indian Constitution
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR (i.e., for candidates falling in the Hyderabad- Karnataka region). Reservations has been made as per the Supreme Court ruling that, reservations for Scheduled Caste, Schedule Tribes and Other Backward Classes would not apply if the Government was filling a single post in a cadre. This is as per UGC Circular No.F.1-5/2006(SCT) dated 5.3.2018, Clause 6(C) and 8(a)(v). All reservations approved by Social Welfare office, Tribal Welfare office and OBC office vide note dated 14-06-2018.Application Form, Revised API format as per above GOK circular framed within & in accordance to Minimum eligibility qualifications as per UGC-2016 Regulation and subsequent modifications issued there in can be downloaded from the University website www.yskub.ac.in, Downloaded application, duly filled in, shall be accompanied by
1. DD for Rs.300/- (Application fee) and DD for Rs.800/- (Rs.400/- for SC/ST/Cat-I candidates)- towards processing fee for the post of Assistant Professor.
2. DD for Rs.300/- (Application fee) and DD for Rs.1200/- (Rs.600/- for SC/ST/Cat-1 candidates)- towards processing fee for the post of Professor and Associate Professor.
3. Candidates who had applied earlier vide VSKU Notification No: VSKUB/ADM/2016-17/103, dated:01.06.2016, vide Notification No:
VSKUB/ADM/2016-17/482, dated:24.12.2016 and vide VSKU Notification No: VSKUB/ADM/2017-18/429 dated 8.8.2017 need not apply once again. BUT they will have to submit relevant information and details in the revised format in 8 (Eight) sets. However, they need not pay the above fees if it has been already paid along with earlier application form. Any new certificates for fresh claim have to be submitted in 8 (Eight) sets."
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
16. Clause 3 again indicates that one need not apply all over again, but updated information must be given. The revised application form is also appended to the petition. The application form appends to it a note. Note No.11 therein is as follows.
"Note
1. Applications and all other details will have to be downloaded from the University website (www.vskub.ac.in) and no printed application form will be supplied by the University.
2. Qualification, pay scales and other eligibility conditions are as per UGC norms as revised from time to time.
3. Demand Draft towards fee shall be drawn in favor of The Finance Officer, Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya Universityy, Ballari.
4. The candidates who wish to apply for more than one post should submit separate application form for each post along with prescribed fee.
5. The selected candidates must be prepared to work in any Post Graduate Centre /Constituent College coming under the jurisdiction of Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Ballari.
6. No TA/DA will be paid to the candidates attending the interview.
7. Late and incomplete applications will be rejected.
8. Any type of direct or indirect canvassing for the post will disqualify the candidate.
9. Duly filled in applications should reach the office of The Registrar, Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Jnana Sagara Campus, Vinayaka Nagara Cantonment, Ballari on or before 30.06.2018.
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
10. The copies of publications, testimonials, certificates, caste certificates, marks cards, and bio-data form should be enclosed to all eight sets of application.
11. Those who are employed should send their application through proper channel. However, an advance copy may be sent directly."
17. Note No.11 indicates that those who are employed should send their application through proper channel. However, an advance copy may be sent directly.
18. As observed hereinabove, the recruitment notification for 371J, the third one was on 14.06.2018. By then, one significant development had taken place. The respondent No.4 had applied in the Forest Department to the post of Deputy Range Forest Officer and pursuant to the selection process therein, the respondent No.4 had already been appointed on 25.09.2017 which is admittedly a date that was anterior to the third recruitment notification dated 14.06.2018. The respondent No.4 notwithstanding her employment therein, applies to the post, but the records nowhere divulge that the updated application was preferred by the respondent No.4 that she was already working as a Deputy Range Forest Officer at the time when the third notification came. The reason for non-divergence
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR could be that the application was directed not to be submitted all over again. At the time of the first application she was not in employment.
19. Be that as it may. The merit list is drawn of the meritorious candidates including the petitioner and the respondent No.4 to the post of Assistant Professor in Botany. The merit list is as follows.
VIJAYANAGARA SRI KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, BALLARI Jnana Sagara Campus. Vinayaka Nagar, Cantonment, Ballan-58210 Candidate List Assistant Professor - Botany Sl. Reg. No. Candidate name Marks No. 1 R318BOT001 Dr.B Uma Reddy 59 2 R318BOT002 M. Siddeshwari 62 3 R318BOT003 Dr. Kavitha Sagar 63 4 R318BOT004 Sreevani B 66 5 R31880T005 Raghavendra D.R. 66 6 R318BOT006 Dr. Kaveri Kamble 49 7 R31880T007 Dr. Venkat M.Sindhe 46 8 R31880T008 Dr. Sundar Shankar 46 9 R31880T011 Aravind N. Barad 52 10 R31880T012 Bheemanagouda N. Patil 53 11 R31880T013 Dr. Shivanand S. Sakal 39 12 R31880T014 Dr. Channabasava A 63 13 R31880T015 Suryawanshi Pooja 43 14 R31880T016 Dr. Ravindra B. K. 42 15 R31880T017 Niveditha B.T. 65 16 R31880T018 Kotresha D 44 17 R31880T019 Pratima 50 18 R31880T020 Arjun 57 19 R31880T021 Kaveri 46
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
20. At Sl. No.2 is the respondent No.4, who secured 62 marks. At Sl. No.4 is the petitioner who secures 4 marks more than the selected candidate in the written examination. Therefore, in the written examination, the petitioner was more qualified, but the selection is not on the basis of the written examination. The score card is drawn after the assessment prior to calling for interview. The score card insofar as the petitioner and the respondent No.4 is concerned is as follows. Name, address D NET/ Marks III (B) III (C) III III III TOTA MARKS ENTRA Category Sl.No. Register no.
MAX. MARKS TOTAL qual III (a) (25+10) Sex with O SLET For 30+20+15+1 45+10+65 (D) (E) (F) L SCORED NCE e-mail & tele B PG 0+5=80 =120 5+15 30+1 10 308 MARKS no. Max. =20 3=43 15% 30% 35 OF OF 100 308 i ii i i ii i i ii ii i ii i ii i i v i 2 M. F S 52.5 23.80 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 62 18.6 42.40 M.Sc R318BOT002 28.08.1992 SIDDESHWARI C 1 SLET 3 Dr Kavita Sagar F S 14.00 1 1 - 5 - - 1 - - - - 2 - - 1.968 53 15.9 31.87 M.Sc. Phd.
R318BOT003 15.11.1975 C 4 0 0 4 SREEAVANI.B F II 51.4 22.62 - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.096 66 19.8 42.52 M.Sc.
R138bo004
16.12.1991
A 1 5
SLET
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
21. The petitioner in the score card assessment secures 42.52, whereas the selected candidate secures 42.40. This was also not conclusive, as interview was yet to take place. An interview call letter is issued to all the selected candidates. Likewise an interview call letter is issued to the petitioner and the respondent No.4. The interview call letter of the petitioner is appended to the petition certain clauses of which assume significance. Clause 1 is the instructions to applicants. Clause 6 indicates that the latest salary certificate and no objection certificate from the employer as on the date if you are in service should be carried to the interview and if it is found to be ineligible, the candidate will not be allowed to appear for interview and the application will automatically be rejected. The identical communication is issued to the respondent No.4 as well. Interview takes place. In the interview, those who have not secured no objections certificate from the respective departments wherever they were working were not even interviewed. But insofar as respondent No.4 is concerned, she is interviewed along with others. The result of interview is as follows.
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR VIJAYAMAGARA SRIKRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, BALLARI Final Score Card of the Candidates who have attended the Interview Interview 05.09.2018: Dept: Botany: Position: Assistant Professor: No. of Post.02 Local Cadre 371(1):
02: Reservation :01 SC & 01 GM Total Sl. Category Horiz.Re Register No. Name of the Candidate Sex DOB Marks No Claimed Claimed (89.8) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 R318BOT004 SREEVANI B F II A 16.12.1991 W 49.354 2 R318BOT002 M. SIDDESHWARI- F SC 28.08.1992 W/R 50.550 3 R318BOT017 NIVEDITHA B T F GM 08.05.1993 W 48.874 4 R318BOT006 DR. KAVERI KAMBLE F SC 08.03.1979 W No NOC 5 R318BOT015 SURYAWANSHI POOJA F SC 12.04.1989 W/KM 38.496 6 R318BOT003 DR. KAVITHA SAGAR F SC 15.11.1975 W 39.851
22. Here the respondent No.4 secures 50.550 while the petitioner secures 49.354 and the respondent No.5 secures 39.851. Therefore, who is in the race is the petitioner and the respondent No.4 on the merit. The selection comes about issuing an appointment order to the respondent No.4 on 07.09.2018.
The appointment order issued to the respondent No.4 is as follows.
No. SKUB/ADM-DPAR/2018-19/96 Date: 07.09.2018 OFFICE ORDER Reference: 1. VSKU Statute No.21 constituted as per KSU Act 2000 and approved by His Excellency the Chancellor of Universities and GOK vide No. ED URE 2018 dated 2.4.2018.
2. GOK Circular No. ED 136 UNE 2017 dated 17.07.2017 and GOK Circular No. ED 572 UNE 2017 dated 25.5.2018 for permitting filling up posts under Article 371(J).
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
3. Notification vide «²æÃPÀÈ«§/DqÀ½vÀ/2016-17/103 205 ¢£ÁAPÀ 01.06.2016.
4. Notification vide VSKUB/ADM/2016-17/482 dated 24.12.2016.
5. Notification vide VSKUB/ADM/2017-18/429 dated 08.08.2017.
6. GOK Circular No.¹D¸ÀÄE39 ºÉÊPÀPÉÆÃ2018 ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.06.2018 asking university to fill up HK Posts within three months from the date of Circular.
7. Notification vide VSKUB/ADM/2018-19/291 dated 14.06.2018.
8. Proceedings of the Board of Appointment (Constituted as per Section 53 (2) (a) (iii) of KSU Act 2000 and approved by His Excellency the Chancellor and GOK vide No. ED.48. URE 2016 dated:
18.02.2017) meeting dated: 05.09.2018.
9. CWP 22610 of 2017 (O&M), CWP 1513 of 2018 (O & M) and CWP 10765 of 2017 along with UGC Circular dated 19.7.2018 and Judgement by Honourable Judge Rajeev Narain Raina dated 31.7.2018 vacating the stay.
10. Letter to the Office of His Excellency the Chancellor vide letter No. VSKU/VCPS/ 2018-19/126 dated 16.08.2018 informing the beginning of interviews by BOA as above.
11. Syndicate Resolution No: 01 dated 07.09.2018.
12. Vice-Chancellor's Order dated 07.09.2018.
*** On the recommendation of the Board of Appointment constituted under Section 53 of K.S.U. Act 2000, UGC regulations 2010 and revised from time to time, VSKUB Statute Governing the Appointment of Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors and Conduct of Interview to Teaching, Academic Staff & Other Allied Posts Under Section 40(1) (K) of KSU Act, 2010 and in pursuance of Syndicate Resolution cited under ref. 11 above Sri/Smt. M. Siddeshwari is appointed to the post of Assistant Professor in the PG Department of Botany Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Ballari, against the existing vacancy in the pay scale of Rs.15,600-39,100 with AGP Rs.6000 plus other allowances admissible under the prevailing University Rules and amended from time to time.
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
23. The proceedings of the Board of Appointment for selecting the respondent No.4 is 05.09.2018 and on 07.09.2018, the appointment order is already issued when was it placed before the Syndicate is unknown. The proceedings of appointment take place on 05.09.2018. The Syndicate immediately meets and ratifies the appointment on 07.09.2018. Vice-Chancellor passes the order on the same day on 07.09.2018. Appointment order is issued on 07.09.2018. While appointments being in the hottest haste would not become on the face of it mala fide, what is the icing on the cake is the objections and the information submitted by the University. An application is made under the Right to Information Act as to whether the respondent No.4 selected candidate had at the time of interview submitted her no objection certificate. The answer is as follows:
Sl. Para Explanation
No.
1 M. Siddeshwari's NOC details at the time
of interview with photo copy
2 Date of her NOC Issued by her Parental
Department
3 Date of Postal inward receipt No. with
photo copy of Register
4 Her Date of Resignation submitted to the
Parental Department with photo copy. NOC Not submitted
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
24. The response to a complaint or communication made by the Vice Chancellor of the University to the Department of Education again assumes significance. The communication reads as follows.
To, Shri Anil Kumar B H IAS Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Education Department (Higher Education). 6th Floor, Second Gate, Government of Karnataka, MS building, Bangalore-560 001.
Ref: Your letter No: ED 06 URE 2019 dated 23.3.2019 Sub: Representation of Dr. S V Prabhakar, Ballari dated 16.1.2019 for necessary action-reg. I have received your letter referred to above. I wish to state the following for your kind information and consideration.
1. Dr. SV Prabhakar of S V Clinic at Ballari has stated that Dr. Kaveri Kamble without NOC came for Interview and the Screening Committee Members had not entertained her and marks are not allotted in the final Score Card and at the same time they have mentioned No NOC. It shows that she has not produced NOC as mentioned in the final Score Card.
2. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7) M Siddeshwari has also not produced NOC and inspite of that selection Committee has taken Interview....... And selected her for the said post ander GM. Our response:
Yes, it is true that Dr. Kaveri Kamble had come without NOC for Interview. As per our rule, we permit the
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR candidates who have not submitted NOC along with their application to come to the interview-just to give one last chance to the candidates to submit NOC. If they do not produce the same (NOC) even at the time of Interview, then we do not allow him/her to the Interview process. This is known to all of the candidates. However, in case of M Siddeshwari, she has not indicated that she was employed at the time of application- as she was not employed. Therefore, the question of her submitting the NOC does not apply. Now Dr. SV Prabhakar claims that M. Siddeshwari was employed! To the best of our knowledge she was not employed either at the time of application, nor at the time of joining the University. Hence the question of any double standard is not true. Dr. SV Prabhakar is making false allegation. He is trying to malign the image of the University just because his Sister's Daughter did not succeed in the Interview. His contention is that we should not select a SC candidate under the GM category. This is unfair to the SC candidates. The University is contemplating filing Defamation case against him. Hence it is best that the allegation is rejected
25. The response to a query by the government is that respondent No.4 has not indicated that she was employed at the time of application, as she was not employed at the time of application. The question of her submitting no objection certificate does not apply. If the clause that called for interview is re-noticed, what would become unmistakably clear is, as on the date of interview, the respondent No.4 was admittedly a Deputy Range Forest Officer in the State Government. Working in the State Government as Deputy Range Forest Officer ought to have submitted her no objection certificate for the purpose of
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR interview. While in terms of the communication, it is not necessary is what is said. While the indication herein above is that it was imperative. Therefore, this is an illegality that cannot be cured. Whether the respondent No.4 has secured NOC from the hands of the Forest Department is also necessary to be noticed. The Forest Department on the information being sought, where the respondent No.4 was working, also gives information that they have not issued any no objection certificate. The communication reads as follows.
¸ÀA:¸À.C.¸ÀA/C.gÀ.vÀ.PÉ/2018-19 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 02.11.2018 UÉ, qÁ. J¸ï. «. ¥Àæ¨sÁPÀgï #105/2, 2 PÁ¼ÀªÀÄä ©Ã¢, §¼Áîj PÁ¼ÀªÀÄä ©Ã¢, §¼Áîj ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉÃ, «µÀAiÀÄ: PÀÄ.JA ¹zÉÝñÀéj, G¥ÀªÀ®AiÀÄ CgÀuÁå¢üPÁj vÀgÀ¨ÉÃvÁyðAiÀÄ §Ä£Á¢ vÀgÀ¨ÉÃw CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ.
G¯ÉèÃR: ¤ªÀÄä ¥ÀvÀæzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ 27/10/2018 *** G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ vÀªÀÄUÉ w½¸ÀĪÀÅzÉãÉAzÀgÉ, CgÀtå vÀgÀ¨ÉÃw PÉÃAzÀæ, E®ªÁ® E°è vÀgÀ¨ÉÃw ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛzÀÝ PÀÄ.JA ¹zÉÝñÀéj, G¥ÀªÀ®AiÀÄ CgÀuÁå¢üPÁj vÀgÀ¨ÉÃvÁyðAiÀÄ §UÉÎ PÉýgÀĪÀ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ w½¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
Sl. Particulars Details
No.
1 Her date of joining to training 01.10.2017
2 Duration of her training 15 months + range
attachment 5 months
(sandwich model)
3 Her date of last attendance 08/09/2018
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022
WP No. 106797 of 2019
HC-KAR
4 She applied for Assistant professor Not applicable
post at Vijayanagara Sri
Krishnadevaraya University Ballari. 5 If she has been asked any NOC from No, not from our office your office, please furnish such information
26. What becomes unmistakably clear in the case at hand is, the respondent No.4 having secured employment in the State Government as a Deputy Range Forest Officer, suppresses the entire facts and participates in the interview, as the Forest Department indicates that they have not issued no objection certificate, the Vice-Chancellor indicates that she need not submit no objection certificate contrary to its own communication and secures employment notwithstanding the employment that she was in State Government.
27. Then comes the theory of resignation by the respondent No.4. The appointment of the respondent No.4 is on 07.09.2018. She reports to duties on 11.09.2018. In the interregnum, a resignation is submitted on 08.09.2018, it is immediately approved on 09.09.2018 and on 11.09.2018, the respondent No.4 reports to duties.
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
28. In the light of the aforesaid facts, what is discernible is, that the respondent No.4 without divulging that she was already in employment and the interview is after seeking permission from the Forest Department, participates in the interview as if she has not been employed anywhere and secures the employment that ought to have been offered to the petitioner.
29. The issue is not on the comparative merit of the matter. If on the date of the interview other persons who had not secured no objection certificate have not even been interviewed, without the no objection certificate, the respondent No.4 is interviewed and selected. It is the opinion of the Vice Chancellor that the respondent No.4's no objection certificate need not be secured as on the date of the application she was not employed. This to say the least is preposterous as the indication is that it is too rudimentary that as on the date of interview in any organization, if a candidate participates in that selection process, notwithstanding anybody's employment in a different organization, no objection certificate is a must, as a candidate cannot secure employment in two places.
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:18022 WP No. 106797 of 2019 HC-KAR
30. Participation and interview and seeking employment is undoubtedly permissible, but with a no objection, as is indicated in the application. The respondent No.4 did not do anything of that sort, but has suppressed everything of that. Whatever defence the respondent No.4 wants to project or the University wants to protect, the appointment of the respondent No.4 cannot but be held to be contrary to law.
31. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The appointment of the respondent No.4 stands annulled. The appointment shall be offered to the petitioner if the petitioner is found fit in all other traits.
iii. The said action shall be undertaken and completed by the University within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RSH / CT: ASC LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 20