IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.15720 OF 2019 (S-PRO) BETWEEN:
DR.H.N.NAGANAGOWDA S/O.H.V.KARIBASAVANA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS WORKING AT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & DIRECTOR FOR SOLAR TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, SHAKTI BHAVAN, 82 RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 R/AT #206, 25TH CROSS YEDIYUR, 6TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 070 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI GANGADHAR R. GURUMATH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. AKKAMAHADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD., SHAKTI BHAVAN, 82 RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE POST OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, R AND D OF THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Sri B.L.Sanjeev, learned Counsel accepts notice for the respondent and the writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of Sri Gangadhar R.Gurumath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.L.Sanjeev, learned Counsel for the respondent.
2. The petitioner is working as a Director for Solar Technology with respondent, and according to him, he is eligible for promotion to the post of Executive Director, Research and Development with the respondent. He is qualified for such promotion, and he has been making repeated representations in that regard, but the respondent has not considered the same.
3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that now the copy of the petition is served on the learned Counsel for the respondent and as the respondent is appraised of the petitioner’s claims for promotion, the writ petition could be disposed of by directing the respondent to consider the petitioner’s claim for promotion to the post of Executive Director, Research and Development in a time bound manner.
4. The learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent would indeed consider the petitioner’s claim for promotion strictly in accordance with law, if another representation is filed separately enclosing a copy of this order of this Court. The learned Counsel for the respondent is categorical that the concession to consider the petitioner’s claim for promotion cannot be considered as acquiescing to any entitlement.
5. In light of these submissions, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition could be disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits of the claim of the petitioner for promotion with liberty to the petitioner to submit a separate detailed representation to the Competent Authority of the respondent enclosing a copy of this order within a period of four weeks from today. If such detailed representation is filed within four weeks from today, the respondent shall consider the representation strictly in accordance with law and expeditiously within an outer limit of four months on receipt of such representation. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE LB