M.BHIMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is filed against the order dtd. 6/12/2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25020/2015 (S-RES) by which the said writ petition filed by the appellant/petitioner seeking quash of order dtd. 22/4/2015 passed in R.P.No.12/2010 and for a further direction to the respondent No.5 to appoint the appellant/petitioner to the post of Physical Education Teacher to backlog vacancy with all monetary benefits is rejected.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant/petitioner that respondent No.5 had invited applications through public notice dtd. 1/3/1990 to fill up various posts including one post of Physical Education Teacher, which is reserved for Schedule Caste Community. That the petitioner belong to Schedule Caste Community and that without following the roster and reservation in the matter of appointment the respondent No.5 appointed the respondent No.6 as Physical Education Teacher on 18/4/1992. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant/petitioner had filed a petition challenging the appointment of respondent No.6 before CRE Cell which after holding enquiry found that there was no violation and accordingly rejected the application. The appellant/ petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.43413/2002 which was dismissed. The appellant/petitioner filed review petition in R.P.No.754/2005 which was rejected reserving liberty to the appellant/petitioner to file an appeal as provided under Education Act. Accordingly, appellant/petitioner filed a revision petition in R.P.No.2/2008 which was also rejected by the authority by order dtd. 8/2/2010 upholding the appointment of respondent No.6. Aggrieved by the same, appellant/petitioner preferred a revision petition in R.P.No.12/ 2010 which was also rejected by order dtd. 31/3/2012. Thereafter, appellant/petitioner filed yet another W.P.No.34082/2014, in that this Court by order dtd. 21/11/2014 set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. After hearing the parties, the appellate Authority by order dtd. 22/4/2015 rejected the said revision petition. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present petition.

(3.) After hearing the submissions of respective counsel, learned Single Judge has noted that public notice dtd. 1/3/1990 issued by respondent No.5-institution inviting applications from eligible candidates did not make any provision for reservation to the post of physical education teacher and it was meant for general merit candidates. The contention of appellant/petitioner that one post of physical education teacher ought to have been filled up by candidate belonging to Schedule Caste category has also been negated. Learned Single judge has also taken note of the fact that initially the post of physical education teacher was filled up by one Sri. Singraiah belonging to Schedule Caste category and as such there is no question of backlog to be filled to the post of physical education teacher. Learned Single Judge has also taken note of the fact that the appellant/petitioner has attained the age of superannuation as he was aged 56 years at the time of the filing the petition and had no purpose would be served to consider the case of the appellant/petitioner for the appointment of post of physical education teacher. Accordingly, dismissed the writ petition.