Karnataka High Court
Gopalkrishna Hegde vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 August, 2023
Bench: M.Nagaprasannapresided Bymnpj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 104777 OF 2021 (S-R)
BETWEEN:
GOPALKRISHNA HEGDE
S/O GANAPATHI KUPPAYYA HEGDE,
AGE. 58 YEARS,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS HEAD-MASTER,
SRI MAHAGANAPATI SAMSKRUTA PATHASHALE,
HEGDE VILLAGE, KUMTA TALUK,
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581330,
R/O. AT. GOWRI KRUPA, NO.158, KALKOD
ROAD, HEGDE POST, KUMTA TALUK-581330,
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER
Digitally (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE)
signed by
VISHAL
VISHAL NINGAPPA
NINGAPPA PATTIHAL AND:
PATTIHAL Date:
2023.08.03
10:27:25 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
+0530 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
(UNIVERSITIES),
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
2. DIRECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF SAMSKRIT EDUCATION,
KARNATAKA SAMSKRIT UNIVERSITY,
PAMPA MAHAKAVI ROAD, CHAMARAJPET,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
BENGALURU-560018.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
KODIBAG, KARWAR,
UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT-581301.
4. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTAN GENERAL (A & E),
KARNATAKA STATE, PARK HOUSE ROAD,
POST BOX NO. 5329/5369,
BANGALORE-560001.
5. VEDA SAMSKRITI ACADEMY (R),
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
SRI. MAHAGANAPATI SAMSKRUTA PATHASHALE,
KALKOD ROAD, HEGDE, KUMTA TALUK -581330,
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V S KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1, R3, R4;
SRI. CHETAN T LIMBIKAI, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
R2 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICELS 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION,
DECLARING THAT THE CONDITION IN THE ORDER
NO.KASUMVI /SUMSHENI . HO. VE. O. PA. SHA /11 /2017-
18/699, DATED 24.03.2018 VIDE ANENXURE-G AND
ORDER NO.ED 419 UNE 2015, BANGALORE DATED
05.02.2018 VIDE ANENXURE-F PASSED BY THE 1ST AND
2ND RESPONDENTS THAT THE PETITIONERS PAST
SERVICE DURING THE NON GRANT PERIOD WOULD NOT
BE CONSIDERED FOR GRANT OF ANY SERVICE BENEFITS
IS ILLEGAL VOID AND NOT BINDING ON THE PETITIONER
& ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
ORDER
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for
the following reliefs:
"(a) ISSUE an appropriate writ, order, or
direction, declaring that the condition in the order
no. KaSumVi/ SumSheNi. Ho.Ve.O.Pa.Sha/11/2017-
18/699, dated 24.03.2018 vide ANNEXURE - G and
order no. ED 419 UNE 2015, Bangalore, dated
05.02.2018 vide ANNEXURE - F passed by the 1st
and 2nd Respondents, that the Petitioner's past
service during the non-grant period would not be
considered for grant of any service benefits is
illegal, void and not binding on the Petitioner;
(b) ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction,
directing the 1 and 2nd Respondents to fix the pay
and pay-scale of the Petitioner by counting the past
service rendered by him during the non-grant
period, from 23.08.1993 to 23.03.2018, in Sri.
Mahaganapati Samskruta Pathashale, Hegde Village,
Kumta Taluk, Uttara Kannada District in terms of
the judgement and order, dated 03.11.2009 of this
Hon'ble Court in Writ Appeal No. 450/2007 and
connected cases and to pay the arrears of salary
determined thereby with 18% interest;
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
(c) ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction,
directing the respondents to fix the pension, leave
encashment and DCRG of the Petitioner under the
Triple Benefits Scheme Rules upon his retirement by
counting the past service rendered by him during
the non-grant period, from 23.08.1993 to
23.03.2018, along with the service rendered by him
during the post-grant period, from 24.03.2018 up to
the date of his retirement in Sri. Mahaganapati
Samskruta Pathashale, Hegde Village, Kumta Taluk,
Uttara Kannada District in terms of the judgement
and order, dated 03.11.2009 of this Hon'ble Court in
Writ Appeal No. 450/2007 and connected cases; and
(d) GRANT such other/ further/
consequential reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit
in the facts and circumstances of this case in the
interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties.
3. The petitioner joins the services of the fifth
respondent - Institution on 23.08.1993. The Institution is
admitted to grant on 05.02.2018. The issue is whether the
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
period between 23.08.1993 to 05.02.2018 should be
reckoned for the purpose of calculation of the service
benefits to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the issue in the lis is pending consideration before the
Division Bench for it having been answered in favour of
the Teachers. In an order passed in the case of Shri
Manjunath K.R. S/o. Late Krishnaraje Urs Vs. The
State of Karnataka and others in W.P. No.519/2021,
disposed of on 10th February 2021, noticing the fact that
the matter is pending consideration before the Division
Bench, this Court in identical circumstances has passed
the following order:
"2. The petitioner in the writ petition was
appointed as Lecture in Geography of a private aided
educational institution to teaching post. He contend
that his 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
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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 petitioner is 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
petitioner in accordance with law."
5. Further, in the case of Sri A. Srikantegowda
S/o. Appajigowda Vs. the State of Karnataka in W.P.
No.3443/2021, disposed off on 18th February 2021,
wherein this Court had disposed off the petition by
observing as follows:
"2. The petitioner in the writ petition was
appointed as a Lecturer on 17.06.1991, to a
teaching post in Sri. Sardar Vallabhabai Patel PU
College, a private aided educational institution. He
contends that the claim is covered in terms of order
dated 16.08.2010 passed in W.P. No.25447/2010,
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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
passedin 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
heldas 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
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
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 petitioner is 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
- 12 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8122
WP No. 104777 of 2021
direction to consider the case of the petitioner in
accordance with law."
6. Since the petitioner is similarly situated and the
issue is also similar, the writ petition would stands
disposed off in terms of the aforequoted orders with the
direction to the State to consider the case of the petitioner
in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VNP
