B GANGADHAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Order of the State Government dated 23. 8. 1997 is the bone of contention of the petitioner, who was working as Administrative officer, till he voluntarily resigned from the services of the University of Agricultural Science, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'university' ).

(2.) BRIEF facts are: petitioner had joined the services of the University on 23. 7. 1971 as Asst. Superintendent (Administration ). He was promoted to the cadre of Asst. Administrative Officer by the University by its official memorandum dated 27. 1. 1986. Petitioner was one of the aspirants to the post of Administrative Officer in the University. The selection committee had recommended his name also along with one another candidate by name Sri Kotresh. The appointing authority appointed sri Kotresh as Administrative Officer of the University and further decided to keep the name of the petitioner in the panel of administrative Officer in reserve to be appointed after the retirement of Sri Kotresh as Administrative Officer. Subsequently, petitioner was appointed as an Administrative Officer by the appointing authority in its meeting held on 9. 8. 1996 and 20. 8. 1996. The State Government taking exception to the aforesaid action of University has passed the impugned order dated 23. 8. 1997 annulling the minutes of the meeting dated 9. 8. 1996 and 20,8. 1996 in so far as the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Administrative Officer of the University. It is the correctness or otherwise of the aforesaid order is called in question by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the same.

(3.) BROADLY, the first and main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was that, the State Government could not have annulled the minutes of the meeting of Board of Regents, resolving to appoint petitioner to the post of Administrative Officer without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 1 will elaborate this submission a little later. First the essential facts are: petitioner was working as Asst. Administrative Officer in the university. The respondent-University by notification dated 28. 2. 1996 invited application from the eligible and qualified candidates for the post of Administrative Officer. The internal and external candidates were eligible to apply for the post advertised. Petitioner as well as one Sri Kotresh had applied for the post. The selection committee constituted for the purpose of selection to consider the relative merits of the candidates, who had applied for the posts, after completion of selection process, drew a panel of the following persons for appointment to the post of Administrative Officer in order of preference as indicated below. 1. Sri Kotresh 2. Sri Gangadhar.