SRIKANATHAN K Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though the matter is listed for orders viz., for noncompliance of office objections and yet again time is prayed for by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners, prima facie, we are not inclined to grant yet persuaded by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that petitioners have good case on merits, we have examined the case papers and on perusal of the same, we are not inclined to entertain these writ petitions for the reasons indicated hereinbelow.

(2.) Petitioners filed O.A.Nos.5537-5562/2018 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru, for quashing the portion of communication dated 15.06.2018 (Annexure-A60) whereunder first respondent had directed the second respondent to proceed with the selection process considering the qualifications prescribed in the notification dated 17.12.2016 (Annexure-A6) issued by third respondent inviting applications for various posts to be filled in various departments of Government of Karnataka and in particular for 137 posts of Geologists, applications have been invited to which petitioners had also applied for. Petitioners had also sought for a direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to consider their candidature for the post of Geologists by declaring M.Tech (Mineral Processing) as being equivalent to M.Sc. (Mineral Processing). On account of said prayer having not been considered by Government, they approached the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short, Tribunal) for the said relief contending inter alia that earlier in the year 1975, M.Sc (Mineral Processing) course was renamed as Master of Applied Science in Mineral Processing (M.A.Sc) and again in the year 1990, Master of Applied Science course was renamed as M.Tech (Mineral Processing) and since then Post Graduation in Mineral processing and Master of Applied Science in Mineral Processing are called as M.Tech (Mineral Processing). In other words, it was contended that subjects taught in M.Tech (Mineral Processing) are equivalent to Master of Applied Science in Mineral Processing and the syllabus are one and the same. Tribunal after examining the plea of the petitioners has found that though petitioners were not even eligible for applying had applied to the posts of Geologists notified, by falsely declaring their educational qualification as M.Sc. (Mineral Processing) in the online application filed by them and it was a false declaration. Hence, candidature of the applicants/petitioners are rejected on the ground of false declaration. Their claim for grant of prayer as noticed herein above was not entertained. That apart, the petitioners' qualification being M.Tech (Mineral Processing) has not been declared as equivalent under Rule 2(h) of Karnataka Civil Service (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977 and as such they would not be entitled to apply for the posts of Geologists invited under the notification in question.

(3.) It is the contention of Mr. Hanumareddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that apart from the declaration of equivalency sought before the Tribunal, petitioners had also sought for a direction to consider their representation to the post of Geologists by declaring M.Tech. (Mineral Processing) as equivalent to M.Sc. (Mineral Processing) and non consideration of this prayer has perforced the petitioners to approach this Court by reiterating their prayer as sought for before the appellate Tribunal.