LAWS(KAR)-2014-3-255

H. HANUMANTHAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On March 19, 2014
Dr. H. Hanumanthappa, M.B.B.S., D.V.D., M.D., (Dermatology) Appellant
V/S
State of Karnataka, represented by its Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Services, The Selection Committee, Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, represented by its Ex -officio Member Secretary and Chief Administrative Officer an Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is to the legality and correctness of a Notification dated 10.02.2011, as at Annexure -C issued by the 1st respondent and to the statement showing the marks obtained in the interview for the selection of the post of 'Director and Dean' of Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, Mysore -570001 (for short, 'M.M.C. & R.I.'), dated 23.01.2014, vide Annexure -E and for a mandamus as against respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to fill the post of 'Director and Dean' of MMC&RI, by promotion of the petitioner on the basis of the seniority -cum -merit and for grant of consequential relief's.

(2.) TO fill the post of 'Director and Dean' of 'MMC&RI' a notification was issued on 31.07.2013 calling for application from the eligible candidates. In response thereto, the petitioner, respondent No. 3 and two others applied to the said post, which is required to be filled up as per the provisions of the Cadre and Recruitment Rules and Byelaws of the Institute. The selection committee having conducted the interview and completed the process of selection on 23.01.2014, the petitioner was awarded 7.62 marks and respondent No. 3 was awarded 8.62 marks. Other two candidates were awarded lesser marks than the petitioner and the respondent No. 3. Selection committee having recommended the name of the respondent No. 3 to the post of 'Director and Dean' of the Institute, respondent No. 3 was appointed as the 'Director and Dean' of the Institute as per the notification dated 10.02.2014 vide Annexure -C issued by the 1st respondent.

(3.) EVEN though, learned advocates appearing for the parties adverted to the respective stands taken by them in the pleadings, I deem it proper to decide this writ petition on a short legal ground, that the respondent No. 1 having not been vested with the power of appointment, is unjustified in issuing the Notification dated 10.02.2014 as at Annexure -C.