IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 30645 OF 2018 (S-RES) AND WRIT PETITION NO. 32906 OF 2018 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI BOMMALINGESHWARA VIDYA SAMSTHE (R) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI. BOMMAIAH LINGA SWAMY, S/O. SRI. S. B. MAHALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/AT SHIDLEKONA GOPALA DEVARAHALLI POST, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 125.
2. SMT. PANKAJA. K. S. W/O. SRI. MANJUNATHA, D/O. SRI. SURAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT TEACHER, R/AT SHIDLEKONA GOPALA DEVARAHALLI POST, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 125.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M P SRIKANTH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE ADDL. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER, PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560 003.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. A.R. SHARADAMBA, AGA) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED ON THE REVIEW PETITION PREFERRED UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT, 1993, HOWEVER, TREATED AS A REVISION PETITION BUT NUMBERED AS APPEAL NO.28/2014 ED 118 DGW 2014 ORDER DATED 30.05.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q; AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA representing the respondents consensually submit that the subject matter of these writ petitions is substantially similar to the one in W.P.No.26838/2018 (EDN-RES), SARVAGNA VIDYA PEETA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS, disposed off on 28.05.2019 and therefore on the principle of parity, similar order needs to be made in these cases also.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the writ petition papers, there is no reason to doubt the submission made at the Bar. Paragraph No.8 of the subject judgment reads as under:
“8. In the circumstances, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner has some force. Hence, the petitioner is permitted to appoint the eligible teachers in open competition and the same shall be subject to the result of the W.A. NO.6087/2017. The petitioner as well as the teachers who will be appointed in open competition shall file an affidavit before this Court that the said appointments shall be subject to the result of the W.A.NO.6087/2017 and no equities shall be claimed by them in the event the said writ appeal is held in favour of the State Government/respondents therein, such an affidavit shall be filed within a period of two weeks from the date of the appointment of the eligible teachers as aforesaid.”
In the above circumstances, this writ petitions is also disposed off accordingly, on the principle of parity.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE Bsv