SURESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is working as Office Superintendent with the second respondent - University, has approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(3.) Facts leading to filing of this writ petition, narrated briefly are, the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Assistant on 3/11/1985. The fourth respondent is said to have been appointed on 11/3/2003. Though, the petitioner was senior to the fourth respondent, the fourth respondent was given promotion to the post of Assistant Office Superintendent overlooking the seniority of the petitioner. Thereafter, even while the petitioner and the fourth respondent were promoted to the post of Senior Office Superintendent, the seniority of the petitioner was overlooked. Subsequently, there was a proposal to promote the fourth respondent to the post of Assistant Registrar. At this juncture, the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the provisional seniority list published by the second respondent on 31/7/2021, vide Annexure-A and also the seniority list that was issued on 13/8/2019, vide Annexures-B, B1 and B2, insofar as it relates to the petitioner and the fourth respondent.