Karnataka High Court
Ramalingaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 February, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
W.P.No.1952 OF 2022(S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. Ramalingaiah,
S/o Chikkaidegowda,
Aged about 67 years,
Retired Head Master,
Sri. Channa Keshava High School,
Hallegere , Basaralu Hobli,
Mandya Taluk and Dist.
R/at No.601,
18th Cross, VV Nagara,
Kallahalli Mandya-571401.
2. Sri. C. Srikanth,
S/o Late Chikkegowda,
Aged about 66 years,
Retired Assistant Teacher,
Sri. Kalabyraveshwara High School,
Halivana, mandya Taluk.
R/at No.742, KHB Extension,
Chikkamandya kere,
Mandya. ... Petitioners
(By Sri.Thyagaraja S., Advocate (VC))
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
2
Department of Primary and
Secondary Education,
M.S. Building, Bengaluru-560 001.
2. The Commissioner for Public Instructions,
Nrupathunga Road,
Bengaluru-560 001.
3. The Director for Public Instructions,
(Secondary Education),
Office at the Commissioner for
Public Instructions,
Bengaluru-560 001.
4. The Deputy Director for
Public Instructions,
Mandya District,
Mandya-571401.
5. The Accountant General in Karnataka(A &E),
Park Road,
Bengaluru-560 001. ... Respondents
(By Smt. M.C.Nagashree, AGA. (PH))
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to Direct the respondents
to reckon and count the past 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
other consequential service benefits and etc.
This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing,
this day, the Court, made the following:
3
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 in various cadre of their respective
Schools/Colleges, which are private aided educational
institutions, to the teaching post. 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 cases of
the petitioners in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Cm/-
