T DAYANANDA Vs. TALUKDEV B D SHIKAR IPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner joined service of the Taluk Development Board, Shikaripur Taluk, Shimoga District, as an Assistant Medical Officer in 1966 and on his appointment he was posted to the Taluk Development Board Dispensary, Maravalli. The petitioner has stated that having regard to his meritorious services he was posted as Medical Officer in the year 1975 to the T.D.B. Dispensary, Hithla within the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent, Taluk Development Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) in August, 1977. A decision was taken by the 2nd respondent-State that a number of dispensaries under the control of the Municipalities and other local authorities should be taken over under the management of the Government. Pursuant to the said decision the Government gave instructions to enter into suitable agreements with Municipalities and other local authorities like the Board for smooth taking-over of the management of these dispensaries and hospitals. It is further alleged that originally it was understood by all that the take over was relatable to all dispensaries under the management of Municipalities and other local authorities, But, however, by an order dated 26-3-1979, the 2nd respondent-State decided to take over 125 allopathic dispensaries, 19 Ayurvedic dispensaries and two Unani dipensaries with effect from 1-4-1979 subject to the conditions mentioned in the order. The true copy of the order is produced along with the petition as Ext.-A. It is alleged by the petitioner that in order to confer an illegal favour on the 3rd respondent, Doctor V. Y. Ramana Gowda was posted as Medical Officer to the Board's dispensary at Hithla within the Board's jurisdiction. In substance, the allegation of the petitioner is that though he was working at Hithla dispensary as a Medical Officer, his posting to dispensary at Yelagere amounted to reversion and was made with the mala fide intention of depriving the petitioner of the benefits of absorption into Government service under Ext-A. It is also alleged by the petitioner that the Chief Officer of the Board (2nd respondent) did not have the power to effect transfers either by virtue of the powers conferred under the Karnataka Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, or any resolution passed by any Taluk Development Board.

(2.) As against these allegations, the 1st respondent has filed a detailed statement of objections through its Chief Officer. It is not necessary to set out in detail the averments made in the statement, of objections. In the statement of objections, it is pointed out that the petitioner was an Assistant Medical Officer and was never promoted as Medical Officer at any time by the 1st respondent-Board. It has further pointed out that the petitioner is a graduate from the integrated College of Medicine, Madras, and is not qualified to bo an Assistant Surgeon as against the claims of the 3rd respondent who is an M.B.B.S. graduate of Karnataka University who possesses the necessary qualification to be Medical Officer-cum-Assistant Surgeon in that category of dispensaries run by the Board which require Medical Officer to be in-charge of such dispensaries. Jt is the case of the 1st respondent-Board that the dispensary at Hithla in Shikaripur Taluk was sanctioned the post of the Medical Officer-cum-Assistant Surgeon to be in charge of it and it was by a mistake that the petitioner was transferred in 1975 from Maravalli to Hthla though he did not possess the requisite qualification to fill the post that had been sanctioned for Hithla dispensary run by the Board.

(3.) In so far as it relates to the allegation of mala fide, the Chief Executive-Officer who has filed the statement of objections on oath has stated as follows :