B. P. SINGH, J. ( 1 ) THE matter has come up for further orders today. With consent of parties, learned counsel appearing on their behalf have been heard at length and the matter is being disposed of finally with their consent. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of the Notification (Annexure-G) dated 26-7-1989 and also the Endorsement dated 1-9-1989 (Annexurc-H) in so far as it pertains to the denial of promotion to the petitioner to the post of Professor of Physical Education, and the proposal of the university to fill up the said post by direct recruitment. ( 3 ) THE facts of the case are not in dispute. The petitioner is a senior teacher and is presently reader and Principal of the Government College of Physical Education. According to the petitioner, the post of Professor in the University college of Physical Education must be filled up by promotion, but the University is seeking to fill up the post by direct recruitment. Annexure-G is the Notification whereby applications have been invited for filling up that post. The petitioner represented to the university to consider her candidature for the post of Professor in the university College of Physical Education and claimed that appointment on the basis of promotion, she being a senior teacher and Reader in the government College of Physical Education. The university by its endorsement Annexure-H has turned down that request and has informed the petitioner that there is no statute providing for promotion to the posts of Professors under Section 49-A of the Karnataka State Universities Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). It is also stated therein that since the petitioner was working as a supernumerary Reader, she was not eligible for promotion as Professor. ( 4 ) IT is not in dispute that a scheme had been framed under Section 49-A of the Act. But that scheme has since been quashed by this Court and is not in existence. It is also stated therein that since the petitioner was working as a supernumerary Reader, she was not eligible for promotion as Professor. ( 4 ) IT is not in dispute that a scheme had been framed under Section 49-A of the Act. But that scheme has since been quashed by this Court and is not in existence. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner relied upon the provisions of Section 49 of the Karnataka state Universities Act, particularly subsection (9) thereof which provides as follows :-" Notwithstanding anything in the proceeding sub-sections, appointments to the posts of Professors and Readers in undergraduate colleges maintained, nominated by the University shall be made by such authority as may be prescribed in the Statutes by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum- merit from Readers and Lecturers respectively : provided that whenever any new subject is introduced, appointment of Professors, readers and Lecturers in such new subject shall be made in such manner as may be prescribed by Statutes,"he submitted that the post of Professor must be filled up by promotion as envisaged by Section 49 (9) of the Act. ( 6 ) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the University submitted that the University College of Physical Education is a composite college where under-graduate and post-graduate courses are taught. He therefore submitted that the relevant provision which applies to such an institution in Section 49-A which was brought in by an amendment by Karnataka Act No. 23 of 1986. ( 7 ) THE question therefore, is whether Section 49 (9) of the Act will govern the case of appointment of a Professor in the University College of physical Education treating the same as a composite college. ( 8 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that merely because post-graduate courses are also taught in a college where undcr-graduate courses are taught, the colleges docs not cease to be an under-graduatc college. For this purpose he relied upon the Judgment of this Court in Bangalore University v Y. R. Sathyanarayana Rao, ILR 1985 (1) (A) Karnatab p. 325. ( 9 ) IT will be noticed that the Judgment of this Court relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner has rendered by this Court when Seclion 49-A had not been incorporated into the act. Section 49-A came into existence in the year 1986. ( 9 ) IT will be noticed that the Judgment of this Court relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner has rendered by this Court when Seclion 49-A had not been incorporated into the act. Section 49-A came into existence in the year 1986. It provides as follows :-"section 49-A:- Appointment in accordance with Promotion Schemes: Not- withstanding anything contained in Section 49 but subject to the rules and orders issued by the State Government from time to time for reservation of appointments and post for scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes, appointments to the post of Reader and Professors in University institutions and departments may be made by the Syndicate in accordance with a promotion scheme if any, prescribed by statutes made in this behalf, if the university institution or department has both under-graduate and post-graduate courses. " ( 10 ) IT is apparent that Section 49 (9) refers to appointments to the posts of Professors and readers in "undcr-graduate Colleges. " It does not refer to a post-graduate college or a composite college, and therefore, normally it must be understood to be confined in its application to under-graduate colleges. In the absence of Section 49-A, a question may well have arisen as to whether by mere reason of post-graduate courses being taught in what was earlier a purely under-graduate college, it lost its character as an undcr-graduate college for the purposes of recruitment to the posts in the under-graduate college. Those difficulties do not arise now in view of the provisions of Section 49-A of the Act which was later inserted by an amendment in the year 1986. Section 49-A begins with a nonobstante clause, and provides that appointments to the post. of Readers and Professors in university institutions and departments may be made by the authorities in accordance with the promotion scheme, if any, prescribed by statutes made in this behalf, if the university institution or department has both undcr-graduate and postgraduate courses. It is therefore apparent that section 49-A specifically deals with University institutions which have both under-graduate and post-graduate courses commonly known as composite colleges. This will obviously include an institution like the University College of Physical education which has both post-graduate and under-graduale courses. It is therefore apparent that section 49-A specifically deals with University institutions which have both under-graduate and post-graduate courses commonly known as composite colleges. This will obviously include an institution like the University College of Physical education which has both post-graduate and under-graduale courses. Section 49-A therefore enables the framing of a scheme by statutes and authorises the Syndicate to make appointments to the posts of Readers and Professors in accordance with such a scheme. It was not disputed before me that no valid scheme is in existence, since the one framed earlier has been quashed by this Court. In the absence of a scheme, there seems to be nothing which prevents the University from filling up the posts of Professors by direct recruitment. The mere fact that a scheme has not been framed does not deprive the Syndicate of its power to make appointments by following any known method of recruitment, including direct recruitment. The only limitation on that power is that it should not be exercised in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner. The university has advertised the post of Professor in the University College of Physical Education and has invited applications from eligible candidates. The petitioner is also one of the applicants, though her application is without pre judicc to her contention that the post can be filled up only by promotion. Section 49-A contains an enabling provision providing for the framing of a scheme in accordance with which the syndicate must make appointments to the posts of Professors and Readers in composite colleges. If such a scheme is framed, the syndicate has no option but to make appointments in accordance with the scheme. However, in the absence of any such scheme under Section 49-A of the Act, the syndicate does not lose its power to make appointments, and is entitled to fill up the post of professor by direct recruitment. Its action must not be arbitrary or unreasonable. I find nothing arbitrary or unreasonable in filling up the post of professor in the University College of Physical education by direct recruitment. Section 49 (9) to my mind will not apply, because it is Section 49-A which specifically governs matters relating to appointment of Professors and Readers in composite colleges. Its action must not be arbitrary or unreasonable. I find nothing arbitrary or unreasonable in filling up the post of professor in the University College of Physical education by direct recruitment. Section 49 (9) to my mind will not apply, because it is Section 49-A which specifically governs matters relating to appointment of Professors and Readers in composite colleges. ( 11 ) I have therefore come to the conclusion that the petitioner has no justifiable reason to challenge the notification issued by the University calling for applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Professor in the University College of Physical Education, nor do I find any illegality in the endorsement annexure-H, whereby the University has rejected the claim of the petitioner that the post of Professor in the University College of Physical education should be filled up only by promotion. ( 12 ) IN the result, this writ petition fails, and is dismissed. --- *** --- .