IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B. V. NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P. NO.23121 OF 2018 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. THE CHAIRMAN, VILLAGE ACCOUNTANTS RECRUITMENT COMMITTEE & DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPURA, DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI I. TARANATH POOJARY, A.G.A.) AND:
1. SRI BASAVARAJ S/O. YALLAPPA ANGADI, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. AREKURAHATTI, TALUK NAVALGUND – 582 208 DISTRICT DHARWAD.
2. SRI KENCHANNAGOUDA K. S/O. REVAPPA K., AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/O. BENNIHALLI, TALUK HARAPPANAHALLI, DISTRICT DAVANAGERE – 583 127. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VINOD PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI UDAYA PRAKASH MULIYA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 10.11.2017 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE, IN APPLICATION NO.5222 OF 2010 AS PER ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION.
I.A. NO.1 OF 2019 IS FILED FOR EARLY HEARING.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A. THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Though this writ petition is listed to consider I.A. No.1 of 2019 which is an application filed by respondent No.1 seeking early hearing of the matter, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides it is heard finally.
2. The State has assailed the legality and correctness of order dated 10.11.2017 passed in Application No.5222/2010 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’, for the sake of conveneince). By the said order, the Tribunal has directed petitioner No.2 herein to issue an appointment order to respondent No.1 herein as Village Accountant against an existing vacancy without disturbing respondent No.2 herein within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
3. We have heard learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent No.1 as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.
4. Briefly stated the facts are that, respondent No.1 herein had applied for the post of Village Accountant pursuant to a notification issued by petitioner No.2 herein on 26/09/2009. Respondent No.1 was not selected. He therefore, assailed his non-selection in Application No.5222/2009 filed by him before the Tribunal. According to the petitioner he had applied for the post of Village Accountant claiming reservation under 3B category. That he had uploaded SSLC marks card, PUC marks card, 3B certificate, rural certificate, certificate of computer training etc. That the candidates were to produce all the documents in original for verification on 15/12/2009. According to the endorsement dated 30/11/2009, respondent No.1 had obtained 84.44% and respondent No.3 had obtained 83.33% in 3B category. Petitioner has contended that he had the requisite merit, but since he had not produced all the documents on 15/12/2009, which was the last date to produce the documents, his candidature was not considered. According to respondent No.1, on account of heavy rains, his house was badly damaged and his documents were misplaced and thereafter he had to obtain certificate from the concerned authority to the effect that he belonged to 3B category. That the said certificate though produced belatedly, ought to have been accepted and appointment given to him as he had the requisite merit. But the appointing authority did not consider the same and as a result, his name was excluded from the final selection list.
5. Learned Additional Government appearing for the petitioner contended that the recruitment process was considered long time ago and there is no existing vacancy in 3B category so as to accommodate respondent No.1 herein. Moreover, he did not submit the original certificate stating that he belonged to 3B category in time. Therefore, his name was excluded from the final select list and the candidate having the requisite merit namely respondent No.2 was appointed. That there is no infirmity in the selection process, but the Tribunal has directed that respondent No.1 herein be accommodated in an existing vacancy, which does not arise. Hence, the impugned order may be quashed.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that on account of heavy rains his house collapsed and he lost his certificate. Subsequently, he obtained another certificate and produced before the authority. The same ought to have been considered as respondent No.1 had the requisite merit. On the other hand, his name has been excluded from the select list. As a result respondent No.1 has been denied for appointment as a Village Accountant. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in passing such an order and that there is no merit in the writ petition.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that so long as the appointment of respondent No.2 is not affected in any way, appropriate orders may be made in the writ petition.
8. The detailed narration of facts and contentions, would not call for reiteration. We find that the Tribunal was justified in directing that respondent No.1 ought to be appointed as a Village Accountant by holding that on account of the destruction of his 3B certificate could not deprive him of reservation in category 3B. He subsequently submitted another certificate after obtaining the same from the concerned authority. That the same ought to have been considered and respondent No.1 ought to have been appointed. But the Tribunal has stated that his appointment ought to be in an existing vacancy. If according to learned Government Advocate there is no existing vacancy where respondent No.1 could be appointed, then he would have to be appointed in a supernumerary post created. To that extent we modify the order of the Tribunal and direct that the petitioners herein appoint respondent No.1 herein in a supernumerary post created for that purpose and comply with the direction issued by the Tribunal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
9. Writ petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms.
In view of disposal of the writ petition, I.A.No.1/19 stands disposed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE hnm/S*