Karnataka High Court quashes appointment of University of Mysore Registrar

The high court quashed the Basappa’s appointment as Registrar (Evaluation) of University of Mysore (UoM). In his order, Justice B M Shyam Prasad observed that the state government had not thoroughly weighed his eligibility for the post, besides not taking into account the opinion of the UoM Vice-Chancellor (VC). 

The court was hearing a petition filed by K M Mahadevan, who had been appointed Registrar (Evaluation) of UoM on March 28, 2023. The petitioner submitted that the state government issued another notification on March 15, 2024 appointing Basappa to the post, and placed Mahadevan’s services with the parent Kuvempu University.

The petitioner contended that his displacement from the post of registrar (evaluation) had happened at the behest of the Chief Minister, at a time when the Model Code of Conduct was in force for the Lok Sabha elections. Advocate Vaishali Hegde, appearing for Mahadevan, argued that Basappa was not qualified for the post of registrar (evaluation). 

It was contended that the provisions of section 18 (1) of the Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000 must necessarily be construed as enabling only a senior faculty member of any university to be appointed to the post in question. According to the petitioner, Basappa, an assistant professor at UoM from October 2022, would not qualify as a senior member, given that 58 professors were working at the varsity. 

On the other hand, the state government argued that Basappa could be counted as a senior member of faculty, pointing to his appointment as the chairman of the Department of Organic Chemistry. It was further pointed out that the state government was well within its rights to appoint Basappa to the post, exercising its power under the ‘Doctrine of Pleasure’ to remove an incumbent. 

The court observed that the proceedings to replace the petitioner had commenced with a note from the CM  to appoint Basappa as Registrar (Evaluation) either with UoM or with the Karnataka State Open University. The court also noted that the UoM VC had, in his note, pointed out that Basappa’s appointment to the chairmanship of the organic chemistry department was owing to the fact that post of professor was not occupied at that juncture. The VC had further stated that he could not be considered a senior member of the faculty. 

The court pointed out that the events had transpired on the eve of the Model Code of Conduct coming into force. The court also said that the government should have examined the question of ‘senior member of a faculty’ in the light of the VC’s opinion that Basappa’s appointment as the Chairman of the Department of Studies would not have come about if there was a professor in the department of Organic Chemistry.

“The Government should have considered all aspects before displacing the petitioner with the third respondent’s (Basappa) appointment. Therefore, the second question is answered holding that the third respondent could not have been eligible to be appointed as the Registrar (Evaluation) only because he is appointed as the Chairman of the Department of Organic Chemistry,” Justice Shyam Prasad said.