CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 12 KAR CK 0023

Shri N.K.Venkate Gowda vs Commissioner of Collegiate Education and Vidya Prachara Sangha

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 2 December 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anand Byrareddy, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 18152 of 2011 (S-RES)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 348 words

Anand Byrareddy

1.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2.

The petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ''B'' Group, is considered for final disposal having regard to the limited prayer made in the writ petition. The petitioner is said to be a qualified Lecturer in History and that he was appointed to the institution run by the fourth respondent - Society on 7.7.2004 and he has been working there since then. It is stated that there are two posts of History in the College, one held by one Nagaraj and the other held by the petitioner. By a communication dated 9.1.2008, the Director of Collegiate Education had called for a statement of the workload conducted in the subject of Kannoda and History for the year 2007-08 and similar statement for the year 2008-09 was also called. This had been submitted by the College to the Joint Director of Collegiate Education as on 28.01.2011. Similar statements for the subsequent years have also been submitted. However, respondents are still to consider the recommendation and therefore, there is a delay in approving the appointment of the petitioner who is otherwise eligible in all respects. It is this which is the grievance of the petitioner.

3.

The learned Government Pleader would not dispute the fact that the statements having been called for as early as in 2008 and the statements of the workload for the several academic years, having been sent to the competent authorities, the same is pending consideration without any final decision being taken, even as on date. Therefore, the petition is allowed with a direction to the third respondent to take a decision, in accordance with law, in the matter of approval of appointment of the petitioner and to regularize his services in the post of Lecturer of History, by passing an appropriate order. The third respondent shall pass such an order as expeditiously as possible, in any event, within a period of eight weeks if not earlier, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.