Karnataka High Court
Sri. Khaja Bandenawaj S/O Babu Gbagawan vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 4 June, 2013
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy, Ravi Malimath
-1-
W.P.No.84145/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
WRIT PETITION NO.84145/2012 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN:
Khaja Bandenawaj
S/o Babu Bagawan
Aged about 36 years,
Behind KSRTC Guest House,
Opposite to Firdous Masjid,
Nehru Nagar, Bijapur-586101.
...Petitioner
(Sri Parashuram R. Hattarkihal, Advocate)
AND:
1. State of Karnataka
Department of Health &
Family Welfare,
Vikasa Soudha,
Dr. Ambedkar Road,
Bangalore-560 001,
Represented by its Secretary.
-2-
W.P.No.84145/2012
2. The Member Secretary &
Chief Administrative Officer,
Special Recruitment Committee to
The post of Psychologist in the
Department of Health & Family Welfare
Services, Ananda Rao Circle,
Bangalore-560 009.
3. Naveen R.C. S/o Jacob C.H.,
Age: Major, No.52, 1st Cross,
Jai Bhuvaneshwari Layout,
K.R. Puram, Bangalore-36.
...Respondents
(Sri Manvendra Reddy, Govt. Advocate for R1 & R2
Sri Umesh Mamadapur, Advocate for R3)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ
in the nature of certiorari by quashing the order dated
22.06.2012 passed by the Hon'ble Karnataka
Administrative Tribunal in Application No.5753/2011,
same is produced at Annexure-'D' consequently by
allowing the application filed by the petitioner herein
before the KAT and etc.
This petition coming on for hearing this day,
Ram Mohan Reddy J., made the following:
ORDER
Petitioner a postgraduate having completed M.A. in psychology responded to the notification dated 18.03.2011 issued by the Special Recruitment -3- W.P.No.84145/2012 Committee to the post of Psychologist in the Department of Health and Family Welfare Services, for recruitment to fill up 10 vacant posts of Psychologists. Petitioner's application, submitted on 18.04.2011 claiming reservation under Category-II(B) was not accompanied by a certificate for having studied in the State of Karnataka from standard 1 to 10, a requirement at condition No.12 of the notification, leading to its rejection followed by a list of rejected applicants and thereafter a provisional list, to which the petitioner filed his objections and a final list to which too petitioner filed his objections, inter alia contending that along with the application was enclosed the certificate.
2. Petitioner called in question the appointment of third respondent to the post of Psychologist reserved for Category-II-B by filing Application No.5753/2011 before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore. The Karnataka Administrative Tribunal after having perused -4- W.P.No.84145/2012 the records and more appropriately the file made available by the learned Government Advocate, noticed that the petitioner's application was not accompanied by the requisite certificate and regard being had to the opinion of the Apex Court in the case of Bedanga Talukdar v. Saifudaullah Khan and others reported in (2011) 2 SCC 85, deprecating the approach of the High Court in directing that the condition with regard to submission of identity card could be relaxed, a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, coupled with the opinion dated 28.03.2000 in W.P.No.15384/1998 of this Court, dismissed the application, by order dated 22.06.2012 Annexure-'D'. Hence this petition.
3. In order to satisfy ourselves over the veracity of the claim of the petitioner that he did enclose the certificate for having studied in the State of Karnataka from standard 1 to 10, called upon the learned Government Advocate to furnish the file relating to the -5- W.P.No.84145/2012 petitioner's application and on perusal we affirm what was observed by the KAT that the certificate is not appended to the petitioner's application. Yet another important aspect that requires notice is that the notification Annexure-'A' does not reserve any right in the recruitment committee to relax the condition No.12, regarding non-furnishing of the certificate of study.
4. In that view of the matter, applying the decision of the Apex Court in Bedanga Talukdar's case supra, to the facts of this case, we find no merit in this petition, and dismiss it accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE swk