Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Selection Authority and Secretary of the Karnataka High School Examination Board, challenged the order dated 09.03.2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi, in Application No. 926/2015. The Tribunal had allowed the application filed by the respondent, Smt. Geetha Dattatreya Gokarn, and directed the petitioner to consider her case for appointment to the post of Secondary School Assistant Teacher (CBZ-Kannada) under GM/Rural category pursuant to the additional list dated 12.09.2013, with all benefits from the date on which other candidates were appointed, except salary for the period with notional fixation. The respondent had applied pursuant to a notification dated 02.04.2012 for the post of Secondary School Assistant Teacher. The Selection Authority published an additional list on 12.09.2013 in which the respondent's name appeared. However, the authority did not appoint her, claiming that she was not in the waiting list. The respondent approached the Tribunal, which allowed her application. The High Court, in the writ petition, examined the legality of the Tribunal's order. The court noted that the additional list was prepared and published by the Selection Authority itself, and the respondent was included in that list. The court held that once an additional list is published, candidates therein are entitled to be considered for appointment. The authority cannot deny appointment on the ground that the candidate was not in the waiting list, as the additional list itself is a valid selection list. The court further observed that the respondent had a legitimate expectation of appointment, and the authority's action was arbitrary. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's order and directing the petitioner to comply with the directions within a period of eight weeks.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment - Additional List - Right to Appointment - The Selection Authority published an additional list of selected candidates for the post of Secondary School Assistant Teacher (CBZ-Kannada) under GM/Rural category. The respondent was included in that list. The authority refused appointment claiming the respondent was not in the waiting list. The Tribunal directed consideration for appointment. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order, holding that once an additional list is published, candidates therein are entitled to be considered for appointment, and the authority cannot deny appointment on the ground of non-existence of a waiting list. (Paras 1-10) B) Administrative Law - Legitimate Expectation - Selection Process - The respondent had a legitimate expectation of appointment as she was selected and placed in the additional list. The authority's action of not appointing her despite the list being published was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Selection Authority is justified in denying appointment to a candidate selected from an additional list on the ground that the candidate was not in the waiting list, when the additional list itself was prepared and published by the authority.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal dated 09.03.2020 in Application No. 926/2015. The petitioner is directed to comply with the directions of the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Administrative Law
- Service Law
- Appointment
- Selection Process
- Additional List
- Waiting List
- Right to be Considered
- Karnataka Education Department (Recruitment) Rules
