IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA :
CIRCUYI' BENCH A'? GULBARGAH H
DATED T318 THE 16TH DAYITJMF' JUNE., 290$" %
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUs?fi-:,E B';s;PA'EIL_: S
WRIT PE'I':'1-'x{:>N m-;- 3359;'-»20o3 ' '
BETWEEN:
SUBHASH PATIL, _ . » -
S/O LATE SHRIMANTH-m9»
AGE:51YEARS,"""
ace; sEN:0R:vL1BRARiAN_,_ . .
12 /0 V.G.CC}LL(fi_E 'Row "
GULBARGA. ' '
. .. PETITIGNER
{2;:%.j%'sR1. S;I§I.€iEiA'P£§;)RAS1?i;3KHAR, ADV.)
» AND:
V1) Vs%1>*ms, 0 §'-- KA-ré NATAKA
. M -.j'1;';:)E9ARTMam'oF EDUCATION,
4_ M.S.,Bi;3ILDIN(}, BANGALORE,
. _ '-- __' RE1:: "pry 17%?-'s SECRETARY
2)" 'fHi{i»vGi)MMISSIDNER ma COLLEGIATE,
- _r«;:>uc:A'rIoN, PALACE RQAD,
BANGALORE.
3) " JOINT DiREC'1"GR
DEPARTMENT OF' EDUCATION,
GK? LBARGA.
4) H.K.E. SOCIE'I'Y'S
V.G.COLLEGE FOR WOMEN,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
GULBARGA.
(BY SR1. s.z.A.I«:HUREsHz, 7
ADV FOR R-1 TO R-3;
SR1 ASHOK KINAGI,
ADV FOR R4)
THE CoNs*m'UTION OF' "Iz~I:).IA--, 1?fIs":AY'III'§:3I-». To QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY REsP0r+3'I§ENT..~m;«I.i;3__ DATED 01-10-2007
VIBE ANNEJXURE »- A [}§§';NYIN.G"T--HE sraaxoe GRADE LECTURER 01?
UGC SCALE ASILLEGALV 5 'V Z
THIS WRIT PETITION Is,'iAm'IcLES £226 85 227 01?
THIS PETITIONii'§*3(§'Mi§'y!{}"'{}NA""§?(§R PRL. HEARING, '§'H§S DAY,
THE eoum MADE '*si.'H'e I3jeLI.QwI'r~Ie;
i;:;~«..I2;;I?»IE_I'~2..
.. J11 Petitiefiipetifioner is challenging the Government Gide;
da'ted {§A3'?'~«05V«2{i:3(L3 Annexure 'E3' anal endorsement issued by
J..DiI'E3CtOI', Collegiate Education Gulbarga vide
vfillilflkiurfi -~
_ V iiifitétitioxier is Working as a Senior Librarian in V.G. college for
Gulbarga mm by the 4&1 respondent. His grievance is that the
‘V vvfbiffleifii ef UGC pay scale which is extended to the librarians working
V.”s.31:1:_der the Government as well as the aided first grade degree celleges
with effect fmm 030 1– 1996 is not given to him. Pefitionefs oonizemgion is
that theugh he has made representation to the respondent authorities
3
through the management to extemd the benefit of UGC _paly..4léeale, no
favourable action is taken by the authority but on ten
endorsement dated 01-10-2007 vide Annexure — fiietifioneif ‘b.ale~–_V
been informed that since he has I10t passed I
not qualified to get UGC pay scale; The ll};-at:v1l:lii*.ionex§.v:{-jg«3.1::t’tt’.11d€§ 45:1
siznilar circumstance one P. when as a
librarian in a private insemaioe “Conn in Writ
Petition No. 3362/ 2002 and on Court by a detailed
order has held that NET qualification for
holding the post the qualification pie-scribed
for pmmotien to the “gin-iduation in library science.
3. In said this Court had raised a question in
paragraph N9. .7′ is azladefr A ll :
r . A duly queefiiiiivflzat remains to be considered is
V l’_peB’tioner is entitled for benefit of UGC
ll’ .el15éy
\A;’1sweIi1:gll’this question this Court has held that the petitioner
did not possess the qualification namely NET he was
Z 2 l téghe promoted to the past of senior librarian and was entitled for
h l.tf£F_QC”9fi5%llsea1e, as is clear from the discussion made in paramph N0. 8
9 of the order. Based on this oxder the petitioner therein
P.M.Sl:1ivamurthy was given the benefit of UGC pay scale as per
Geverument order dated 07~O5-2005 vide Azmexure ‘Bi However, it is
i.-
5
not sustainable in iaw. Clause 9 in-trorpoxated in the Goveziireexgt ontier
passed yanting similar benefit to Shivamufirhy vide ;ean_not
come in the way of considering the case of petit;io3::_e;:t:,f{ii?.Vhié§:’entif]em.efiz__
for grant of UGC pay scale as
Shjvamurthy’s case that possesssing qualifieatiezfof Aie*;:z’9tn
for holding the post of senior 1ibra1iai1*.r.jf”for ecaie.
7. In that View of thejémathit Vsueceeds. The
impugned endorsement vide Armexfin: Respondent No.2
and 3 are directed to eozieider igfie of vpeiitiener for grant of UGC
pay scale in the :.}.b1′.,!]i_{f= Vherein above and ignoring
condition No. order Axmemne -B and also
taking note of ‘.tk;¢« gzfief this Court in Writ Petition No.
3362/202.__ ” ‘ A ”
Sd/W
ISDGE
“*wfi{*f”