Ineligible Candidate Has No Locus: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Order Cancelling Appointment Of Zoology Professor In State University

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a single bench order which cancelled the appointment of one Dr M. David to the post of Associate Professor, Zoology Department in the Karnataka University on the ground that he cannot claim caste status since he belongs from Andhra Pradesh.

The order was set aside by division bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Umesh M Adiga citing lack of of locus standi of the original petitioner, who was declared ineligible in the selection process. Significantly, the contentions regarding caste certificate have not been addressed by the Court.

It observed,

“For the purpose of being aggrieved, the petitioner is required to demonstrate that in the event he had succeeded, he would be entitled to be appointed. Where there are other eligible persons, attack to the selection of the respondent No.4 (David) at the instance of the petitioner is impermissible, in the absence of arraying the others as parties.”

Bench said if the petition is entertained, it would be on the ground of Public Interest Litigation which is impermissible in Service matters.

The single judge bench had allowed the petition filed by Dr. H Krishna Ram questioning the appointment of David, contending that he did not furnish Academic Performance Indicator (A.P.I.) and Performance Based Appraisal System (P.B.A.S.) as per UGC Regulations 2010. It was also claimed that having migrated from Andhra Pradesh, David is ineligible to claim the status of Scheduled Caste candidate in Karnataka.

At the outset, the division noted that there were others in the merit list who were stated to be eligible, including Dr. Aladakatti RH (Sl.No.2), Dr. CBGanesh (Sl.No.4) apart from David and none of them had been made parties in the present proceedings.

Further, it noted that the petitioner had not called in question his non-selection nor he challenged the selection process, but the challenge was only as regards David's alleged ineligibility on the basis of his caste certificate. “If that were to be so, the proper course of action was to challenge the validity of the caste certificate and the consequences would follow,” it remarked.

Further the court rejected the contention of the Special Counsel appearing for the State that Validity Certificate ought to have been obtained in terms of Rules 6 and 9 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointment, etc.) Rules, 1992. It said, “There was no such pleading on record before the learned Single Judge and fresh contention regarding the same at this stage ought not to be entertained.”

Thus, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Single Judge keeping open contentions on merits.

Case Title: Dr M David And Department of High Education & others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL No.100234 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 210

Date of Order: 26-05-2023

Appearance: Senior Advocate Shridhar Prabhu for Advocate Lingesh V Kattemane for petitioner

Special Counsel C. Jagadish FOR R1 & R3.

Advocate Veeresh R Budihal for R2.

Advocates Vijaykumar, J.A. Pattar, P. Banakar FOR C/R4.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment