JUDGMENT : P.B. Bajanthri, J. In the instant petition, petitioner has questioned the validity of resolution dated 2.2.2013 (Annexure-H) and communications dated 14.2.2013, 20.3.2013 and 30.9.2013 passed by respondent No.1. Further, he has sought for mandamus to respondent No.1 to annul the resolution dated 2.2.2013 of the Syndicate of respondent No.1 at its first General Meeting for the year 2013 and communications dated 14.2.2013, 20.3.2013 and 30.9.2013 passed by respondent No.1 in exercise of its powers under Section 10(1) of the Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000. 2. Petitioner was appointed to the post of reader in the 1st respondent University of Mysuru in the year 2003. He is stated to have held the posts of Reader and Professor. Further, he was appointed as the Director Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Reasearch and extension centre, Manasagangotri, Mysuru which is part and parcel of Respondent 1- University. So also, he was appointed as a guide for the students pursuing Ph.D programs in "Ambedkar Studies" by the 1st respondent. Thus he has rendered over and above one and half decade of distinguished and unblemished service with the 1st respondent. He was also involved in academic activities. While working as such, he had an opportunity of making an application for the post of Professor in the respondent No.3 - Vijayanagara Sri Krishnadevaraya University. Pursuant to petitioner's application which has been routed through respondent No.1, he was selected and appointed to the post of Professor with respondent No.3 - Vijayanagara K. University. Petitioner had submitted resignation to 1st respondent, which is a conditional one, vide Annexure-R1. On 9.1.2013 petitioner was relieved by respondent No.1. Thereafter, petitioner intended to return to respondent No.1 University, which was not allowed by respondent No.1 on the score that the petitioner did not have the lien in respondent No.1 University. Thus, a resolution has been passed on 2.2.2013 and further communications have been made to the petitioner that he does not have the lien in respondent No.1 University. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no doubt petitioner has submitted conditional resignation vide Annexure-R1, but the same has not been accepted even to this day. That apart, relieving order/letter dated 9.1.2013 is only relieving the petitioner from the post of Professor in the respondent No.1 University. Thus, respondent No.1 has not acted on the petitioner's conditional resignation to the extent of its acceptance. That apart, relieving order/letter dated 9.1.2013 is only relieving the petitioner from the post of Professor in the respondent No.1 University. Thus, respondent No.1 has not acted on the petitioner's conditional resignation to the extent of its acceptance. On the other hand, relieving order is final in respect of reporting of the petitioner in the respondent No.3 University. During probation period, petitioner is entitled to come back and report to duty with first respondent, as he had lien over the post in the first respondent. In support of these contentions, he relied on the provisions of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (for short 'KCSR'), which has been adopted by the first respondent. Rule 19, 20(f) and 252(b) of the KCSR would assist the petitioner's contentions in the absence of acceptance of conditional resignation of the petitioner and the fact that he has been only relieved from the post. Hence, resolution and consequential communications of the first respondent are liable to be set aside. 4. It was further contended that the petitioner has obtained information under the Right to Information Act that in identical circumstances, respondent No.1 has extended the benefit of lien for nine officials of the first respondent University. Petitioner's case is also identical to that of nine officials, whose names are reflected in Annexure-N dated 8.11.2013. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 resisted the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and vehemently contended that the petitioner has no lien over the post of Professor in the respondent No.1 University for the reason that once he has been relieved and read with the conditional resignation submitted by him vide Annexure-R1 read with the fact that he has gone and reported as a Professor in the third respondent, he has no lien over the post. 6. It was further contended that Rule 19, 20(f) and 252(b) of KCSR has no application to the petitioner's case for the reason that the petitioner has taken another appointment in different University, and hence the aforesaid provision is not attracted. The above provisions are attracted only in respect of common University, if a person takes another appointment in the same University. 7. It was further contended that when the petitioner himself has submitted a conditional resignation on 28.4.2013 (Annexure-R1), petitioner cannot go beyond the submission of conditional resignation. The above provisions are attracted only in respect of common University, if a person takes another appointment in the same University. 7. It was further contended that when the petitioner himself has submitted a conditional resignation on 28.4.2013 (Annexure-R1), petitioner cannot go beyond the submission of conditional resignation. In respect of discrimination issue is concerned, it is contended that no doubt in those cases illegalities might have been committed by the first respondent, illegal benefit to any officials of the 1st respondent University cannot be extended to the petitioner. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 9. Crux of the matter in the present petition is whether the petitioner has lien over the post of professor in the first respondent University or not? 10. Undisputed facts are that the petitioner was working as a Professor in the first respondent University. While working as such, he had submitted application for the post of Professor in the third respondent through proper channel respondent No.1. The first respondent has not insisted for resignation of the petitioner since the petitioner's later appointment is with the third respondent University, which is a different University. On the other hand, petitioner has been relieved even though petitioner had submitted conditional resignation and it has not been accepted. To that extent, no material has been produced by the respondent No.3 even to this day. In other words, petitioner's representation relating to conditional resignation has not been acted upon to the extent of accepting it. 11. In view of these facts and circumstances, what remains is only relieving letter of the respondent No.1 to the petitioner. 12. In the case of relieving of an officer or an employee in such circumstances, he has a lien over the post held by him. The petitioner's lien cannot be terminated unless and until resignation is accepted by the respondent No.1. As on this day, there is no acceptance of resignation of the petitioner. Rule 19, 20 and 252(b) of the KCSR reads as follows: "19. The petitioner's lien cannot be terminated unless and until resignation is accepted by the respondent No.1. As on this day, there is no acceptance of resignation of the petitioner. Rule 19, 20 and 252(b) of the KCSR reads as follows: "19. Unless his lien is suspended under Rule 20, a Government servant holding substantively a permanent post retains a lien on that post.- (a) while performing the duties of that post; (b) while on foreign service, or holding a temporary post or officiating in another post; (c) during joining time on transfer to another post; unless he is transferred substantively to a post on lower pay, in which case his lien is transferred to the new post from the date on which he is relieved of his duties in the old post; (d) while on leave; (e) while under suspension. 20.(a) Government shall suspend the lien of a Government servant on a permanent post which he holds substantively if he is appointed in a substantive capacity. (1) to a tenure post, or (2) x x x x x (3) Provisionally to a post on which another Government servant would hold a lien had his lien not been suspended under this Rule. (b) Government may at its option, suspend the lien of a Government servant on a permanent post which he holds substantively if he is deputed out of the State of Karnataka or transferred to foreign service, or in circumstances not covered by clause(a) of this Rule, is transferred in an officiating capacity to a post in another cadre and if any of these cases there is reason to believe that he will remain absent from the post on which he holds a lien for a period of not less than three years. (c) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (a) or (b) of this Rule, a Government servant's lien on a tenure post may in no circumstances be suspended. If he is appointed substantively to another permanent post his lien on the tenure post must be terminated. (d) If a Government servant's lien on a post is suspended under clause (a) or (b) of this Rule, the post may be filled substantively, and the Government servant appointed to hold it substantively shall acquire a lien on it, provided that the arrangements shall be reversed as soon as the suspended lien revives. (d) If a Government servant's lien on a post is suspended under clause (a) or (b) of this Rule, the post may be filled substantively, and the Government servant appointed to hold it substantively shall acquire a lien on it, provided that the arrangements shall be reversed as soon as the suspended lien revives. Note - When a post is filled substantively under this clause the appointment will be termed as provisional appointment; the Government servant appointed will hold a provisional lien on the post and that lien will be liable to suspension under clause (a) but not under clause (b) of this Rule. (e) A Government servant's lien which has been suspended under clause (a) of this Rule shall revive as soon as he ceases to hold a lien on a post of the nature specified in sub-clause (1) or (3) of that clause. (f) A Government servant's lien which has been suspended under clause (b) of this Rule shall revive as soon as he ceases to be on deputation outside the State of Karnataka or on foreign service or to hold a post referred to in clause (b) provided that a suspended lien shall not revive because the Government servant takes leave if there is reason to believe that he will, on return from leave continue to be on deputation outside the State of Karnataka or on foreign service or to hold a post referred to in clause (b) and the total period of absence on duty will not fall short of three years or that he will hold substantively a post of the nature specified in sub-clause (1) or (3) of clause (a). Note 1 - Only one provisionally substantive appointment is permissible against one post. A provisionally substantive appointment is permissible against a vacant permanent post. Note 2 - The power to make provisionally permanent arrangements and to order suspension of lien is delegated to Heads of Department in the case of non-gazetted Government servants. Note 3 - The lien of a Government servant cannot be suspended while he is on probation in another post. If the Government servant completes the period of probation satisfactorily, suspension of lien may be made with retrospective effect from the date on which the Government servant was transferred to other duty, provided that the conditions in clause (b) above are otherwise satisfied. If the Government servant completes the period of probation satisfactorily, suspension of lien may be made with retrospective effect from the date on which the Government servant was transferred to other duty, provided that the conditions in clause (b) above are otherwise satisfied. Note 4 - When a Government servant who has secured employment in one Department of Government under the rules of recruitment, seeks employment on his own accord in another unit or Department or in another cadre or grade in the same Department, his lien on the original appointment shall be continued to be maintained provided he has already been confirmed in the post till he is permanently absorbed in the Department or cadre in which he is newly appointed and he shall be given the benefit of the past service for purposes of leave and pension. If, however, he is temporary in the first appointment, he will cease, to have any connection with his old appointment but he shall be given only the benefit of the past service for leave and pension. (g) (i) A Government servant's lien on a post may in no circumstances be terminated even with his consent if the result will be to leave him without a lien, or a suspended lien upon a permanent post. (ii) x x x x (h) Government may transfer to another permanent post in the same cadre the lien of a Government servant who is not performing the duties of the post to which the lien relates, even if that lien has been suspended. Note - The Head of the Department is empowered to transfer a lien provided that he or an authority subordinate to him is authorised to make appointments to both the posts concerned. (i) A Government servant's lien on a post shall stand terminated on his acquiring a lien on a permanent post whether under the Central or State Government outside the cadre on which he is borne.(emphasis supplied) 252.(a) x x x x (b) Resignation of an appointment to take up, with proper permission, another appointment, whether permanent or temporary, service in which counts in full or in part, is not a resignation of public service." 13. Rule 19 of the KCSR provides that an employee is entitled to have the lien even though if he is sent to foreign (deputation or on OOD). 14. Rule 19 of the KCSR provides that an employee is entitled to have the lien even though if he is sent to foreign (deputation or on OOD). 14. Petitioner's later appointment had not been followed by the acceptance of resignation. Petitioner was not confirmed in the 3rd respondent University. Rule (20) (h) note (i) is crystal clear that government servant's lien on a post shall stand terminated on his acquiring lien on a permanent post whether under the Central or State Government outside the cadre on which he is borne. Therefore, petitioner has lien over the post of Professor in the first respondent. Accordingly, resolution dated 2.2.2013 (Annexure-H) and communications dated 14.2.2013, 20.3.2013 and 30.9.2013 passed by respondent No.1, are set aside. Writ petition stands allowed. Respondent No.1 is hereby directed to accept the reporting of the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, and extended consequential benefits flowing from such.