Case Note & Summary
The case involves two writ appeals arising from an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Petition No.100928/2022. The appellant in WA No.100263/2022 is the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, represented by its Registrar, challenging the interim order dated 03-06-2022. The appellant in WA No.100264/2022 is Dr. R. Basavarjappa, a Professor of Agronomy, who sought to set aside the same interim order and allow the writ petition as prayed. The respondents include Dr. Digambarappa, the State of Karnataka, and others. The dispute pertains to the appointment of the Head of the Department of Agronomy. The learned Single Judge had passed an interim order directing status quo to be maintained. The University and Dr. Basavarjappa filed separate appeals against this order. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Krishna S. Dixit and Justice P. Krishna Bhat, heard the appeals. The Court noted that the appeals were against an interim order and that the Single Judge had exercised discretion based on prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. The Court found no perversity or lack of jurisdiction in the order. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed as devoid of merit. The Court also directed that the writ petition be disposed of expeditiously, preferably within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Interim Relief - Appointment as Head of Department - The University challenged the interim order of the Single Judge directing status quo regarding the appointment of the respondent as Head of Department - The Division Bench held that the appeal against an interim order is not maintainable unless the order is perverse or passed without jurisdiction - The Court found that the Single Judge had applied the correct principles of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury - Held that the appeal was devoid of merit and dismissed (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ appeal against an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge is maintainable and whether the appellant has made out a case for interference with the discretionary order.
Final Decision
Both writ appeals are dismissed as devoid of merit. The writ petition is directed to be disposed of expeditiously, preferably within three months.
Law Points
- Interim relief
- service law
- writ appeal
- maintainability of appeal against interim order
- prima facie case
- balance of convenience
- irreparable injury
Case Details
2022 LawText (KAR) (06) 37
WA No.100263 of 2022 (S-RES) C/W WA No.100264 of 2022 (S-RES)
Justice Krishna S. Dixit, Justice P. Krishna Bhat
Sri. Ramachandra A. Mali (for appellant in WA 100263/2022), Sri. P.N. Hatti (for caveator/respondent 1), Sri. G.K. Hiregoudar (Government Advocate for respondent 2), Sri. Jagadish Patil (for appellant in WA 100264/2022)
The University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad (in WA 100263/2022); Dr. R. Basavarjappa (in WA 100264/2022)
Dr. Digambarappa, State of Karnataka, Dr. R. Basavarjappa (in WA 100263/2022); State of Karnataka, Registrar of UAS, Dr. Digambarappa (in WA 100264/2022)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeals against an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge in a service dispute regarding appointment as Head of Department.
Remedy Sought
The appellants sought to set aside the interim order dated 03-06-2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.100928/2022.
Filing Reason
The University and another party were aggrieved by the interim order directing status quo regarding the appointment of the Head of Department.
Previous Decisions
The learned Single Judge had passed an interim order on 03-06-2022 in W.P. No.100928/2022.
Issues
Whether the writ appeal against an interim order is maintainable?
Whether the Single Judge's order suffers from perversity or lack of jurisdiction?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellants argued that the interim order was erroneous and not sustainable in law.
The respondents supported the interim order, contending that the Single Judge had correctly exercised discretion.
Ratio Decidendi
An appeal against an interim order is not maintainable unless the order is perverse or passed without jurisdiction. The Single Judge had applied the correct principles of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Judgment Excerpts
The appeals are against an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The order does not suffer from any perversity or lack of jurisdiction.
The appeals are devoid of merit and are accordingly dismissed.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed before the learned Single Judge who passed an interim order on 03-06-2022. Aggrieved by that order, the University and Dr. R. Basavarjappa filed separate writ appeals under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961. The appeals were heard together by the Division Bench and dismissed on 24-06-2022.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka High Court Act, 1961: Section 4
