Bangalore University to be governed by Karnataka Civil Services Rules to fill up backlog vacancies: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held that the Bangalore University will be bound by the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 2001 to fill up backlog vacancies for SC/STs to the post of teachers.

A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Aravind Kumar rejected a contention by senior advocate Sanjay M Nuli that Section 53 of the Universities Act was the guiding principle for appointments to the post of teachers in the university.

The court also did not agree to his submission that Section 78 of the Universities Act gives an overriding effect to the provisions of this law over other laws.

The matter arose before the court on a plea by Chaitra Nagammanavar against the Karnataka High Court's single as well as division bench orders which quashed her appointment as an assistant professor in the English department of Bangalore University.

The HC found the appointment of the appellant who belonged to the ST category in 2019 was in violation of the Karnataka State Civil Services (Unfilled Vacancies Reserved For Persons Belonging to the SCs and STs) (Special Recruitment) Rules, 2001, for giving her a preference to other candidates falling between the age bracket of 29 and 40 years.

The university, however, went by its own procedure and appointed the appellant on the basis of merit, though the advertisement declared that 'mode of selection’ would be as per the 2001 Rules.

Senior advocate Shailesh Madiyal, for the appellant, claimed the declaration by the university in its advertisement in 2018 to fill up backlog vacancies as per mode of selection under the 2001 Rules was a mistake. He also claimed the university is an autonomous institution and can never be bound, much less governed, by rules intended to regulate State Civil Services. Advocate D L Chidananda, however, defended the High Court's decision.

Senior advocate Gagan Gupta, on whose plea the HC passed the order making him successful, submitted that Sub-section (1A) to Section 4 of the Reservation Act, 1990, required an establishment, i.e., the university, to take action for filling the backlog vacancies as a one-time measure by following the method prescribed by the government.

The bench, however, held that the conduct of the university in not responding to the categorical demands of the state government by its repeated letters on February 27, 2018, May 22, 2018 and June 09, 2021 to implement the 2001 Rules is conclusive about its acceptance of the applicable law and the policy.

"Hence, the requirement of the government to specify the manner, procedure and time for identifying, filling backlog vacancies and completing the same was amply clear to the university. It is with this view that the university advertised that the ‘mode of selection’ shall be as per the 2001 Rules," the bench said.

The court upheld the HC's order and dismissed the appeal.

The bench, however, directed the University to create a supernumerary post for the appellant who continued to the post since 2019 as it created unfortunate and extraordinary situation by its indifferent conduct in not following the 2001 rules.