SAVITA RENUKA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have taken up this matter for final disposal with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner, who is working as the Chief Officer, Taluka Panchayath, Aurad -B has called into question the first respondent's order, dated 19.7.2014 (Annexure -D), insofar as it pertains to posting the respondent No. 4 in the place of the petitioner.

(3.) SRI Patil submits that the notification, dated 21.12.2013 (Annexure -B) transferring the petitioner as the Chief Officer, Taluka Panchayath, Aurad states that as and when the officers from the Karnataka Municipal Administrative Services ('KMAS' for short) are available, the non -KMAS officers have to go back to their earlier positions. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be disturbed until and unless a KMAS Officer is posted to her place. He also brought to my notice the Karnataka Municipal Administrative Rules, 1970. Serial No. 4 of Schedule II providing for the method of recruitment stipulates that only the Managers belonging to Municipal Service, Revenue Officers belonging to Municipal Service, Senior Health Inspector belonging to Municipal Service and Managers in the office of DMA can be absorbed as Chief Officers Grade II. The respondent No. 4 does not even meet the bare eligibility criteria to be absorbed as the Chief Officer Grade II. Therefore, he could not have been posted to the place presently occupied by the petitioner.