IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.S.INDRESH WRIT PETITION No.58399/2017(S-RES) BETWEEN:
Dr.(MS) B.K.Naik Daughter of K.T.Naik Aged about: 55 years Associate Professor and in-charge Ilkal, Bagalkot Dist Karnataka-587 101 (By Sri Janardhan G., Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka Ministry of Higher Education Represented y its Secretary Vidhana Soudha Bangalore- 560 001 2. The Director Office of the Director of Collegiate Education Government of Karnataka Seshadri Road, Bengaluru-560 001 ... Petitioner 3. The Joint Director Office of the Joint Director of Collegiate Education Government of Karnataka Dharwad-580 001 4. The Chairman Sri Vijaya Mahantesh VV Society Ilkal, Bagalkot Dist Karnataka-587 101 5. SVM Arts, Science and Commerce College, Ilkal, Bagalkot Dist Karnataka-587 101 Rep. by its Principal ... Respondents (By Sri Viranagouda Biradar, AGA for R1 to R3; Sri S.B.Hebballi & Sri V. Muniraj, Advocates) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's request under Annexures 'D' and 'E' dated: 09.10.2017 and 19.07.2017, consider her request for appointment as Principal to the 5th Respondents College on regular basis with all service benefits and etc.
This petition coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Though this writ petition is listed for Orders, by the consent of the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. A short question involved in this writ petition is with regard to consideration of the representations dated 09.10.2017 and 19.07.2017 vide Annexures-D & E, respectively submitted by the petitioner to respondent No.5.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that there is no impediment for the respondent-authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law.
5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
6. In addition to above observation, it is open for the petitioner to file one more representation with all particulars relating to the claim made by the petitioner and the same shall be considered by the respondent- authorities in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE BL