@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
K.L. Manjunath, J.@mdashThe petitioner No. 1 is an association registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The 2nd petitioner is its trustee. The 1st petitioner is an association of Physical Education Teachers who are working in various Colleges affiliated to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences.
2. Section 20 of the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1994, deals with, the "Authorities of the University". One of them is the "Senate". Section 21 deals with the Senate of the University. The senate shall consists of different members from different faculties. u/s 21(1)(xii), Five teachers, other than professors elected from amongst themselves shall also constitute the members of the Senate. Section 2(m) of the Act defines the "Teachers", which reads as hereunder;
(m) "Teachers" includes Professors, Readers, Assistant Professors, Lecturers and such other persons giving instruction on full time basis in a college or institution of health science.
3. Relying upon the definition of "Teacher", the members of the 1st petitioner society gave a representation to the respondent to include them on the rolls of the teachers to enable them to exercise their vote while conducting elections for the Senate and also to permit them to contest in the elections to the Senate.
4. Contending that their representative to include their names in the electoral roll of the University for the teachers has not been considered the present petition is filed requesting the Court to direct the respondent to treat Physical Education Teachers working in the Colleges affiliated to the University as Teachers within the meaning of Section 2(m) of the Act and to further include them in the list of voters for electing members of the Senate u/s 21(1)(xii) of the Act.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
6. Mr. N.B. Bhat, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relying upon the definition of Teachers as defined u/s 2(m) of the Act, contends that there is no justification for the respondent in not including the members of the 1st petitioner as voters to enable them to exercise their franchise in the Senate elections. According to him, though Section 2(m) of the Act or 2(b) of the Act does not discriminate between the Teachers who are teaching medical faculty and non-medical faculty, relying upon Sub-sections (m) and (n) of Section 2, he contends, since the members of the petitioner work on full time basis in a Medical College, they are entitled to become voters in order to exercise their franchise while conducting Senate elections. Therefore, ho contends that their valuable rights are not considered by the respondent.
7. To support his arguments, the counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the unreported Judgment of this Court (Division Bench) in Writ Appeal No. 1685/1980 (The Bangalore University, Jhana Bharathi, Bangalore v. A.J. Belgaumi) wherein their Lordships have held that in view of the definition of "Teachers" and "Teachers of the University" the Physical Education Teachers are also liable to be treated as Teachers. He has also relied upon the Judgment of the Supreme Court in
8. Per contra, the learned Counsel appearing for the university contends that there is a difference between Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act and the Karnataka State Universities Act 19976, since the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences has been established only to teach medical faculties and that the Senate should consist of the Teachers who teaches the medical faculty only. The non-medical faculty teachers cannot be treated as teachers within the meaning of Section 21 of the Universities Act and they cannot fall u/s 2(m) of the Universities Act. He further contends that the Physical Education is a Compulsory in other Colleges wherein the Colleges are affiliated under the Karnataka state Universities Act. Drawing this thin line of distinction, he requests the Court to dismiss the petition.
9. Having heard the counsel for the parties, this Court has examined the definition of Section 2(m) of Rajiv Gandhi university of Health Sciences Act and also the definition clause of "Teachers" and the "University Teachers" as defined under the Karnataka State Universities Act 1976. After the perusal of the definitions in both the Acts this Court does not see any change, when this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1685/80 has taken a view that Physical education teachers are to be regarded as teachers. The same principles has to be followed in this case also.
10. This Court could have appreciated the arguments of the learned Counsel for the University provided under Sub-section (m) of Section 2 of the Act, if any such distinction had been made in between the teachers who teaches the Medical science and the Physical education teachers. When such a distinction is not there in the definition of the "Teachers", I have to consider the case of the petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. A direction is issued to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner as Teachers.
