Skip to content

Bangalore University Vs. Y.R. Satyanarayana Rao - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.As. 171 and 172 of 1981
Reported inILR1985KAR325; 1984(2)KarLJ305
ActsKarnataka State Universities Act, 1976 - Sections 49
AppellantBangalore University
RespondentY.R. Satyanarayana Rao
Appellant AdvocateT. Radhakrishana, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateH.S. Jois, Adv. for R-1 and R-2
.....of 1976) - section 49 (9) under-graduate college does not cease to be so by mere introduction of post-graduate courses therein -- section applicable for recruitment to existing posts in under- graduate college and inapplicable to recruitment of posts exclusively for post-graduate department.;bangalore university invited applications for posts of professors and readers in department of mechanical engineering in visvesvaraiah college of engineering which remains an undergraduate college in which post-graduate courses were introduced in 1966. the teaching staff of college eligible for promotion challenged direct recruitment as contrary to section 49 (9). learned single judge allowing the writ petition held there shall be classification for posts for post-graduate and under-graduate..........visvesvaraiah college of engineering.'on may 10, 1966, the government approved the introduction of post-graduate courses in civil and mechanical engineering at the said college.for the purpose of governing the several universities in the state, the state has enacted a common act called 'the karnataka state universities act, 1976 (karnataka act no. 28 of 1976)' (shortly the 'act').section 49 of the 'act' provides for appointments of professors, librarian, readers and lecturers in theuniversities. such appointments are required to be made by selection by the board of appointment constituted for the purpose. that is direct recruitment. section 49 (9) of the 'act', however, provides for promotion to the posts of professors and readers in under-graduate colleges of the universities.the.....

Jagannatha Shetty, J.

1. The Bangalore University and the Principal of the University of Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering are the appellants. The appeals are directed against the order of the Learned Single Judge allowing Writ Petitions Nos. 10731 of 1978 and 8215 of 1979.

2. The matter arises in this way :

The College of Engineering at Bangalore maintained by the then University of Mysore was one of the reputed Under-Graduate Colleges. Upon the constitution of the Bangalore University under the Bangalore University Act, 1964 (Mysore Act No. 26 of 1964), that College stood transferred to the Bangalore University under Section 68 of the said Act and has been since renamed as 'University of Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering.'

On May 10, 1966, the Government approved the introduction of Post-Graduate Courses in Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the said College.

For the purpose of governing the several Universities in the State, the State has enacted a common Act called 'The Karnataka State Universities Act, 1976 (Karnataka Act No. 28 of 1976)' (shortly the 'Act').

Section 49 of the 'Act' provides for appointments of Professors, Librarian, Readers and Lecturers in theUniversities. Such appointments are required to be made by selection by the Board of Appointment constituted for the purpose. That is direct recruitment. Section 49 (9) of the 'Act', however, provides for promotion to the posts of Professors and Readers in Under-Graduate Colleges of the Universities.

The Bangalore University issued a notification dated July 2, 1980, inviting applications for appointments to various posts in the University inclusive of the posts of Professors and Readers in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering.

The teaching staff in the said College who are eligible for promotion as Professors moved this Court with the Writ Petitions challenging the method of recruitment provided in the said notification. They contended that the directrecruitment to the posts of Professors and Readers would be contrary to Section 49(9) of the 'Act' since the Collegecontinues to be an Under-Graduate College.

Learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petitions. He held that the College after the introduction of Post-Graduate Courses became a Composite College. There shall beclassification of posts for Post-Graduate and Under-Graduate Courses. The appointment to posts of Readers and Professors; in the College, except in the Post-Graduate department, shall be by promotion in accordance with Section 49(9) of the 'Act'. The recruitment to the posts in the Post-Graduate department shall be only by direct recruitment. With these conclusions, the learned Judge issued some directions to the University.

The correctness of the view taken and the validity of the directions issued by the learned Judge have been assailed in these Writ Appeals.

3. The short question that arises for consideration is whether Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering, which was once admittedly the Under-Graduate College, has ceased to be so upon introduction of Post-Graduate Courses in two disciplines by the Government Order dated May 10, 1966 If the College has ceased to be Under-Graduate College, then there is no dispute that Section 49 (9) has no application to regulate the recruitment to the posts of Professors and Readers in that College. If, on the other hand, the said Under-Graduate College with all the staff continues to remain as such notwithstanding theestablishment of Post-Graduate Courses, the operation of Section 49(9) cannot be excluded.

4. To determine these questions, it may not be necessary to hold whether the College is a Composite College or not.

The expression 'Composite College' has not been used in any Eenachment or Statute and we, therefore, refrain from using that expression in our judgment.

We have not been referred to any order of the Government upgrading the Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering as a Post-Graduate College. All that has been done by the Government Order dated May 10, 1966 was only to introduce Post-Graduate Courses in Civil and Mechanical branches at that College. Mere introduction of Post-Graduate Courses in two disciplines in the existing Under-Graduate College will not have the effect of disappearance of the Under-Graduate College. The Visvesvaraiah College of Engineering was an Under-Graduate College from the very inception. It has had its own establishment with the teaching staff and the courses of study. The students are still admitted to that College to undergo the degree course. After the completion of the prescribed course, they are still conferred with degrees in various branches. Let us now ask a simple question. What happened to the staff in that College, the courses offered and the degrees conferred Mr. Radhakrishna, Learned Counsel for the University, did not say that that College has disappeared, but he said that the features of that College has changed upon the introduction of the Post-Graduate Courses in two branches and Section 49(9) applies only to Under-Graduate College and not to a College where Post-Graduate Course is also introduced.

We do not think that these contentions are sound. The said College with all its teaching staff, establishment and courses of study continues to remain as it was The fact that there was an introduction of Post-Graduate Courses in Civil and Mechanical branches has not changed the course of study at the Under-Graduate level. That being so, Section 49(9) of the'Art' cannot be excluded for recruit-meat to the posts in that Under-Graduate College.

We, however, make it clear that the staff pattern and the method of recruitment to the post created exclusively for the Post-Graduate department in that College would be completely outside the purview of Section 49 (9), We need not issue any specific direction in this regard and it is for the University to take proper steps in the light of this order.

With these observations, the order of the Learned Single Judge stands modified and the Writ Appeals are accordingly disposed of.


Mr. Radhakrishna, Learned Counsel for the University, seeks a Certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court.

These cases, in our opinion, do not involve any substantial question of law of general importance needing to be decided by the Supreme Court.

The certificate prayed for is, therefore, refused.

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //