Karnataka State Commission For SC/ST Has No Adjudicatory Power In Service Matters: High Court

Update: 2022-11-03 06:05 GMT

The Karnataka High Court has said that the State Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes Commission is not conferred with adjudicatory powers under the Karnataka State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2002 and it cannot direct regularisation of services. A single judge bench of Justice S.G. Pandit allowed the petition filed by the Executive...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Karnataka High Court has said that the State Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes Commission is not conferred with adjudicatory powers under the Karnataka State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2002 and it cannot direct regularisation of services.

A single judge bench of Justice S.G. Pandit allowed the petition filed by the Executive Director-cum-Appointing Authority of Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society and set aside the 2016 order of the Commission directing regularisation of service of Jyothi Mallappa Savanalli as Principal of Morarji Desai Residential School Arakeri.

The petitioners had submitted that the principal approached the Commission with a prayer to regularise her services in the petitioner-Institution as Principal. The Commission has no jurisdiction or authority to decide the service dispute. The functions of the Commission are prescribed under Section 8 of the 2002 Act and it is only a recommendatory authority. Further, it was said that the Commission is not conferred with the power to adjudicate dispute between the parties.

Findings:

On going through the records the bench said, "The subject matter of the complaint is with regard to service conditions of the second respondent. Admittedly the first respondent – Commission is not conferred with the Adjudicatory Power under the Act. The Commission could not have directed the petitioner to regularise the services of the second respondent as Principal. The first respondent –Commission could not have entertained the complaint of the second respondent with a prayer for regularisation of her service."

It then said, "Under Section 8 of the Act, the Commission could enquire on the issues enumerated therein and could appropriately recommend corrective measures to the appropriate Authority."

Referring to the High Court judgement in W.P.No.63405/2016 dated 23.11.2020, wherein the court held that the first respondent –Commission has no adjudicatory jurisdiction, the bench allowed the petition.

Also Read: Karnataka State Commission For SC/ST Cannot Direct Govt To Withhold Grants to School: High Court

Case Title: THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-CUMAPPOINTING AUTHORITY KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY v. THE KARNATAKA STATE SCHEDULED CASTES/SCHEDULED TRIBES COMMISSION & ANR

Case NO: WRIT PETITION No.36193/2016

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 440

Date of Order: 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

Appearance: S.L.PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE for petitioner; C.JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R1

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Tags:    

Similar News