Karnataka High Court
Sri. Radhakrishna Rao K vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 May, 2021
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.9161/2021 (S - RES)
BETWEEN
1. SRI. RADHAKRISHNA RAO K.,
S/O LATE SHANKAR NARAYAN RAO K.,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
OCC.RETIRED SELECTION GRADE LECTURER,
WORKED AT BADRIYA PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
KANDAK, MANGALURU - 575 001
D. KANNADA DISTRICT.
AND ALSO
SRI RADHAKRISHNA RAO K.,
S/O LATE SHANKAR NARAYAN RAO K.,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT D NO.2-270, MAMATHA
NEAR NANDA GOKULA YUVAKA MANDALA,
MARPALLI P.O AND VILLAGE,
KORANGRAPADY,
UDUPI (TQ) AND (DIST) - 574 118.
2. SRI HAMZA U.N.,
S/O LATE P.MOIDU KUTTY
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
OCC: RETIRED LECTURER IN HISTORY
WORKED AT BADRIYA PRE-UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE KANDAK
MANGALURU - 575 001
D. KANNADA DISTRICT.
2
AND ALSO
SRI HAMZA U.N.,
R/AT NO.14-6-934/25,
FLAT NO.301,
CLASSIQUE PARADISE
APPARTMENT, K.S.RAO ROAD,
MANGALURU - 575 001.
3. SRI ISMAIL N.,
S/O MAMU BEARY
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
OCC.RETIRED PRINCIPAL
WORKED AT BADRIYA PRE-UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE KANDAK
MANGALURU - 575 001
D. KANNADA DISTRICT.
AND ALSO
SRI ISMAIL N.,
R/AT SHAMA, DEKKADU,
MUNNAR POST,
D. KANNADA
MANGALURU - 575 017.
4. SRI JAYARAMA PUNJA
S/O LATE NARAYANA PUNJA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
OCC: RETIRED PRINCIPAL
WORKED AT SRI DURGAPARAMESHWARI TEMPLE
PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, KATEEL,
D. KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 148.
AND ALSO
SRI JAYARAMA PUNJA
SRI DIVI RAM NAGARA,
1ST CROSS, KINNAGOLI,
3
MANGALURU
D.KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 150.
5. SRI P.H.HAMEED
S/O LATE P.ABDULLA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
OCC.RETIRED PRINCIPAL
WORKED AT MADANI
PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
ALOKOLA, ULLALA,
MANGALURU
D. KANNADA - 574 148.
AND ALSO
SRI P.H.HAMEED
R/AT COTTAGE BABBUKATTE
PERMANNUR
SOUTH KANARA - 575 017.
6. SMT.G.JANAKAMMA
W/O K.LAKSHMINARYANA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
OCC.RETIRED LECTURE IN KANNADA
WORKED AT MILAGRES PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
HAMPANKATTA, MANGALURE
DHAKSHINA KANNADA - 575 002.
AND ALSO
SMT. JANAKAMMA
R/AT NETRAVATI NAGARA,
KANKANADY, NEARGARODI
MANGALURU
SOUTH KENARA - 575 002.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI MARUTHI G.B., ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
4
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY
EDUCATION AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
MULTISTORIED BUILDING
VIDHANA VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 01.
2. THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENRAL (A AND E)
KARNATAKA BEGNALURU
P.B. NO.5369, A BLOCK
NEW BUILDING,
PARK HOUSE ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001
REPRESENTED BY IT
SR.ACCOUNTS OFFICER.
3. THE DIRECTOR
PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION,
18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560 012.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT
UDUPI.
5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
D.KANNADA - 575 001.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, AGA (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO GRANT ALL THE RETIREMENT
5
BENEFITS AND RE-FIX THE PENSION BENEFIT BY CONSIDERING
SERVICE OF THE PETITIONERS FROM THE DATE OF
APPOINTMENT AS PER REPRESENTATION DATED 02.11.2019
MARKED AT ANNEXURE L TO L5 RESPECTIVELY 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 their services rendered by them
prior to the admission of the institution, where they were
working, to grant in aid.
2. The petitioners in the writ petition were appointed as
principals/lecturers of a private aided educational institution to
teaching / non-teaching posts. 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 are 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
nvj
CT:MJ
