Can't Compromise On Qualification When Appointing Director Of Medical Institute: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Dr Uday Mulgund questioning an order by which he was repatriated to his original Post of Professor of the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, from the Post of First Director Haveri Institute of Medical Sciences.A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The qualification cannot be given a gobye on any circumstance...
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Dr Uday Mulgund questioning an order by which he was repatriated to his original Post of Professor of the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, from the Post of First Director Haveri Institute of Medical Sciences.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The qualification cannot be given a gobye on any circumstance whether it is for the appointment of first Dean cum Director or the subsequent Dean cum Director.”
The petitioner was promoted to the post of Professor with effect from 2019. After about three years of serving as a Professor in KIMS, Hubballi, he was deputed as Special Officer for the establishment of new Medical College at Haveri. Following which he was appointed as a Director of Haveri Institute of Medical Sciences, for a period of four years or until further orders. The petitioner assumed charge and was functioning as a Director of the Institute. However, petitioner was sent back to his Post of the Professor at KIMS, Hubballi and fourth respondent was posted in his place.
The petitioner argued that if his services are put together he would come within the ambit of being qualified to hold the Post of Director. Further, the conditions of appointment, qua qualification would become necessary only for direct recruitment and not to an appointee who gets appointed at the hands of the State Government. The transfer order is violative of the order that appoints the petitioner as it was for a period of four years or until further orders, it was contended.
The respondents opposed the plea saying that the power of first appointment though is with the Government, but that cannot be without qualification. Admittedly the petitioner is not qualified to hold the post of Director in terms of the Rules / Bylaws of the Institution as also the Regulations of the MCI for teaching personnel, it was submitted.
The bench referred to the service conditions or the recruitment and other Traits of recruitment as is governed by the Haveri Institute of Medical Sciences, Haveri Rules & Regulations, 2017.
Relying on Regulation 18, which pertains to appointment of Dean and Director, the court said “Regulation 18(1) permits the Government to appoint the first Dean cum Director after getting satisfied as to his / her qualifications and eligibility specified in Clause (3). The Dean cum Director who is appointed therefore cannot be appointed dehors qualification. The qualification prescribed for appointment to the Post of Director is in terms of the minimum qualification of Teachers in the Medical Institution Regulations of the Medical Council of India.”
Noting that for an appointment to the Post of Dean cum Director one should have the minimum of ten years of teaching experience as Professor, Associate Professor or reader, out of which at least five years should be as a Professor in any Department, it said,
“If the qualification of the petitioner is considered on the bedrock of what is prescribed by MCI or what is found in the Rules and Regulations, the petitioner would not satisfy the qualification as is necessary (supra). The petitioner does have ten years of teaching experience, but lacks a minimum five years out of that, as Professor. As the petitioner is appointed as Professor only in the year 2019 and is yet to complete five years falling short of one year as Professor for him to become eligible to be appointed as a Director of the Institute.”
Following which it held, “The Governments’ right to appoint the Dean cum Director of an Institution which is newly born, would not mean that such Dean cum Director, who would be appointed has no qualification to hold the post.”
It added, “In the light of the petitioner falling short of qualification of five years as Professor, in the considered view of the Court is ineligible to hold the post of Director of the Institute.”
Appearance:
Advocate V M Sheelvant for petitioner.
AGA M.M. Khannur for R1 & R3.
Advocates V.R. Sarathy Sharanabasaaraj for R4.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 420
Case Title: Dr Uday Mulgund And State of Karnataka & Others
Case No. WRIT PETITION NO. 105637 OF 2023