S GOWRISHANKAR Vs. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY JNANA BHARATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a law teacher in the Law College run by the second respondent Management. According to the petitioner since he is of the status of the reader in law in the said college, as per the statute of the Bangalore University the Management is required to consider his name for appointment to the post of principal; but, on the other hand, the Management issued a notification calling for applications to fill up the post of Principal in the newspaper which according to him is not correct.

(2.) TODAY the petitioner has filed another application seeking for quashing another notification published in the newspaper calling for application during the pendency of this Writ Petition. In support of his contention the petitioner has taken me through certain statutes governing the service conditions of the teachers in the colleges affiliated to Bangalore University. The Law College run by the second respondent Management is one of the affiliated colleges of Bangalore university. It is not disputed that the petitioner is appointed by the second respondent Management as a lecturer in the law college. Now the question that arise for consideration is; whether the petitioner is qualified for appointment as a principal as per the statutes of the university. Statute 24. 3 reads as follows:-

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent Management submits that in the respondent's Law College there is no person who is qualified to be appointed as a principal. If that is so, the only course open for the Management is to call for application to fill up the post of principal. The University also having taken into consideration that there are no qualified persons to be appointed as Principal directed the Management to appoint a Principal by direct recruitment. Therefore, I find no illegality in calling for application by notification published in the newspaper to fill up the post of Principal of the law college.