Karnataka High Court
R.G. Krishnaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 February, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION No.3487/2022(S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1 . R.G. KRISHNAIAH
S/O GANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 52 YE ARS
RETIRED LIBRARY ASSISTANT
P.E.S EVENING COLLEGE
MANDYA
MANDYA DISTRICT
R/AT KL845
BEHIND APMC YARD
V.V. NAGARA, MANDYA.
2 . M. NAGARAJU
S/O MADAIAH
AGED ABOUT 61 YE ARS
R ETIRED ATTENDER
P.E.S EVENING COLLEGE
MANDYA
MANDYA DISTRICT
R/AT NO. 19
KHB COLONY
BANNUR ROAD,
NEAR RTO OFFICE, MANDYA.
...PETITIONERS
2
(BY SRI.PADMANABHA R., ADV.(VC))
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
M.S. BUILDING
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU 560 001.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
(PRIMARY AND SECONDARY)
M.S. BUILDING
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COLLEGIATE
EDUCATION
PALACE ROAD
BENGALURU 560 001.
4. THE DIRECTOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF
COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
PALACE ROAD
BENGALURU 560 001.
5. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR
MYSORE DIVISION
MAHARANI S COLLGE CAMPUS
3
HUNSUR ROAD
MYSORE 570 001.
6. THE DIRECTOR FOR PRE
UNIVERSITY EDUCATION
18TH CROSS
SAMPIGE ROAD
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU 560 012.
7. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E)
IN KARNATAKA
PARK HOUSE
PALACE ROAD
BENGLAURU 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. M.C. NAGASHREE, AGA. (PH))
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 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 APPROVAL OF
THEIR APPOINTMENT WITH AID FOR THE PURPOSE OF
FIXATION OF PAY SCALE, SENIORITY, INCREMENTS
INCLUDING TBA, PENSIONARY BENEFITS AND OTHER
CONSEQUENTIAL SERVICE AND MONITORY BENEFITS
FLOWING THEREOF BY DISPOSING THE PRESENT
PETITIONS IN TERMS OF THE ORDER DTD 24.01.2022
PASSED IN WP.NO.24492/201 VIDE ANNX-B.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
4
ORDER
Smt.M.C.Nagashree, learned AGA is directed to
take notice to respondents-State.
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 both teaching and 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 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
DM
