Case Note & Summary
This writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 arose from the dismissal of WP No.21841/2015 by a Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court on 19.01.2018. The appellant was originally a Deputy Registrar at Kannada University, Hampi, whose services were deputed to the second respondent–Karnataka Janapada Vishwavidyalaya–as a Senior Research Officer, a non-teaching post, for three years. Taking note of his research contributions, the Syndicate of the second respondent university passed a resolution dated 11.04.2014 under Section 73 of the Karnataka Janapada Vishwavidyala Act, 2011 to absorb the appellant as Director-cum-Professor in the Centre of Folklore Translation, converting one of the posts of Professor for this purpose. The appellant was appointed on 06.12.2014. Subsequently, the State Government issued order dated 07.05.2015 annulling the Syndicate resolution, revoking the absorption, repatriating the appellant to his parent university, and ordering recovery of the excess salary paid. The appellant challenged this government order in the writ petition. The Single Judge dismissed the writ with costs of Rs.15,000/–, upheld the government order, held that the post of Director-cum-Professor was non-est for want of the Chancellor’s assent under Section 39(2), that Section 73 did not authorize absorption, that approval under Section 73 was pre-decisional, that the appellant was not eligible under the Cadre Rules, and that the occupation of the post was illegal, making the excess salary recoverable. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the instant writ appeal. Before the Division Bench, the appellant contended that the government order was unenforceable because it was not published as required under Section 8 of the Act, relying on ITC Bhadrachalam Paper Boards v. Mandal Revenue Officer and Rajendra Agricultural University v. Ashok Kumar Prasad. He further argued that the order violated principles of natural justice as he was not heard before his repatriation and recovery of salary. The court heard the parties and considered the material on record, but the available judgment text ends without recording the court’s analysis or final decision on the appeal. Consequently, the final outcome of the appeal is not mentioned in the extracted portion, and the legal positions reflected are those enunciated by the Single Judge in the impugned order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Absorption - Section 73 of Karnataka Janapada Vishwavidyala Act, 2011 - Absorption not authorized - Provisions of Section 73 do not provide for nor authorize appointment by way of absorption; absorption of petitioner as Director-cum-Professor was therefore illegal (Paras 5(v)). B) University Law - Creation of Post - Section 39(2) of Karnataka Janapada Vishwavidyala Act, 2011 - Chancellor’s Assent - Post of Director-cum-Professor is non-est in law for want of Chancellor’s assent as mandated under Section 39(2) (Para 5(iv)). C) University Law - Approval Requirement - Section 73 of Karnataka Janapada Vishwavidyala Act, 2011 - Pre-decisional Approval - Approval under Section 73 is pre-decisional; appointment order dated 12.06.2014 was contrary to the Act in absence of such approval (Para 5(vi)). D) Service Law - Eligibility and Cadre Rules - Petitioner not eligible to be appointed as Professor under the Rules for Cadre and Recruitment; re-designation and equating of posts illegal (Para 5(vii)). E) Service Law - Recovery of Excess Salary - Amount paid in excess to salary entitled as Senior Research Officer liable to be recovered due to illegal occupation of post (Para 5(ix)).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition and upholding the Government Order cancelling deputation and absorption; whether the Government Order dated 07.05.2015 was valid despite non-publication under Section 8; whether the absorption and appointment were legal under the Act.
Law Points
- government order annulling syndicate resolution must be published under Section 8 of the Act to be enforceable
- principles of natural justice require hearing before repatriation and recovery
- Section 73 does not authorize absorption
- Chancellor's assent mandatory under Section 39(2) for creation of post
- appointment contrary to Act is void ab initio
