Sri. Kodandarama S R vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 1352 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                          BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

       WRIT PETITION No. 2444 OF 2019 (S-RES)


BETWEEN :


1.     Sri. Kodandarama S.R.,
       S/o. Ramaiah,
       Aged about 50 years,
       Working as Principal,
       C.V.G. Pre-University College
       Dabaspet, Nelamangala Taluk,
       Bengaluru Rural District.

2.     Smt. Suma H.V.,
       W/o. Ravishankar G.,
       Aged about 42 years,
       Working as Lecturer
       C.V.G. Pre-University College,
       Dabaspet, Nelamangala Taluk,
       Bengaluru Rural District.
                                             ...Petitioners

(By Sri. Padmanabha R., Advocate)(VC)

AND:

1.     The State of Karnataka
       Represented by its Principal Secretary,
       Department of Primary and Secondary Education,
       M.S. Building, Bengaluru-560001.
                             -2-


2.    The Director for Pre-University Education,
      18th Cross, Sampige Road,
      Malleshwaram, Bengaluru - 560012.

3.    The Deputy Director of Pre-University Education,
      Bengaluru Rural District,
      B.P.Wadia Road, Basavanagudi,
      Bengaluru - 560004.
                                           ... Respondents

(By Smt. M.C.Nagashree, AGA)(PH)

       This Writ Petition is filed Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents to
reckon and count the part service rendered by the
petitioners from the date of their initial appointments up to
the date of approval of their appointment with aid
respectively for the purpose of fixation of pay scale,
seniority, increments including TBA, pensionary benefits
and etc.

      This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing
this day, the court made the following:

                          ORDER

The petitioners in this writ petition have sought

for a direction by issuance of writ in the nature of

mandamus to the respondents herein to reckon the

service rendered by them prior to the admission of the

Institution, where they are working, to grant in aid.

2. The petitioners in the writ petition were

appointed on 2.6.1994 and 1.6.2000, to a teaching

post in C.V.G. Pre-University College, Dabaspet,

Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru District, a private aided

educational institution. They contend that their claim

is covered in terms of order dated 16.08.2010 passed

in W.P. No.25447/2010, order dated 22.09.2011

passed in W.A.No.4788/2010, order dated 02.07.2012

passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC

No.7365/2012, the order dated 06.12.2012 passed by

the Apex Court in Review Petition (Civil)

No.2364/2012, Government Order dated 22.02.2013,

the order dated 30.07.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.11299-

11309/2013 and the order dated 16.07.2013 passed

in W.P.Nos.29293-94/2013.

3. The learned Additional Government Advocate

appearing for the respondents-State would accept that

the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgments but

submits that the matter is pending before the learned

Division Bench.

4. This Court in W.P. Nos.9623-24/2015

disposed of on 13.01.2016, while noticing the fact of

the pendency of writ appeal No.2476/2015, has held

as follows:

"4. But in order to overcome the judgments of this Court, the State had enacted the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulations of pay, pension and Other Benefits) Act, 2014, thereby denying the pay scale of University Grants Commission for the period mentioned above. The said Act was challenged by filing large numbers of writ petitions. The writ petitions were decided by common judgment in the case of Dr. B.K. Naik (supra). By the said judgment, this Court had struck down the Act as unconstitutional. This Court had further directed the Government to pay salary to

the petitioners therein, and to others similarly situated persons, as was being paid before the impugned enactment.

Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners before this Court is to extend the benefits of said judgment to them as well.

5. The learned counsel for the State submits that the judgment dated 10-7- 2015 passed in the case of Dr.B.K.Naik (supra) has been challenged before a learned Division Bench of this Court. The relevant extract of the order dated 27-11- 2015 passed by the learned Division Bench is as under:

"Insofar as the in-service respondents are concerned, we record the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying their current emoluments in terms of the re-fixation, subject, however, to the result of the writ appeals. However, they are restrained from initiating any recovery

proceedings for recovery of the arrears of pay".

6. According to the said order, the learned Division Bench has recorded the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying their current emoluments in terms of the re-fixation, subject to the result of the writ appeals.

7. Considering the fact that the learned Advocate General has made a statement before the learned Division Bench, and in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Dr.B.K. Naik (supra), this Court also directs the State to re-fix the pay scale payable to the petitioners. However, it should be made amply clear that the re- fixation of the pay scale would be subject to the decision of the writ appeal pending before this Court in Writ Appeal No.2476 of 2015."

5. Since the petitioners are similarly situated

and the issue raised is also similar, the writ petition

stands disposed in terms of the aforesaid order passed

by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court with a direction

to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance

with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ckl