Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. However, respondent No.1 informed the appellants that his case was pending before the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.7211/2012 and therefore, any promotion or up- gradation would be without prejudice to his rights and at the risk of the appellants.

- 28 -

NC: 2025:KHC:28804-DB HC-KAR AND 2 OTHERS

8. The appellants NITK, issued an advertisement on 22.09.2010 and the same was challenged by respondent No.1 in W.P.No.34409/2010. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 contended that the advertisement inviting the applications for the direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor, issued by the appellants NITK is illegal and the same was challenged in W.P.No.12998/2009 and W.P.No.12999/2009.

- 29 -

NC: 2025:KHC:28804-DB HC-KAR AND 2 OTHERS Dr. Srikantha, challenged the act of the appellants-NITK in not appointing them under the CAS scheme as per the guidelines of the Government of India. It was a scheme where the assessment was to be made on the basis of the qualifications and evaluation of the performance and an interview. They also challenged the act of the appellants NITK of not granting them the AGP and not selecting them for the post of Associate Professor and Professor respectively contending that it was a non interview based promotion, which was to be given.

14. It was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge that the appellants- NITK had appointed Prof. H.V. Sudhakara Nayak, to consider the grievances of the writ petitioners and to submit a report to the appellants- NITK. The report of Prof.H.V. Sudhakar Nayak was placed before the learned Single Judge wherein, he had suggested two solutions for the grievances of respondent Nos.1 and 2.

15. After noting the report of the Committee of Prof.H.V. Sudhakar Nayak, the learned Single Judge disposed of all the batch of writ petitions by a common order and directed the appellants- NITK to implement the solutions suggested by the Committee.

17. Being aggrieved by the directions issued in W.P.No.11878/2013 and W.P.No.11880/2013, the appellants- NITK have preferred W.A.No.501/2025 and W.A.No.505/2025. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of R.P.No.70/2025 and R.P.No.67/2025, the appellants- NITK have filed W.A.No.500/2025 and W.A.No.509/2025.

18. In the meanwhile, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed Contempt Petition in CCC No.709/2024 seeking action against the appellants for willful disobedience of the impugned orders.