Karnataka High Court
Smt. Vasantha. A vs State Of Karnataka on 2 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
WP No. 12317 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT PETITION NO. 12317 OF 2023 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT. VASANTHA A.
W/O SATHISHKUMAR G.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT NEW PATEL STREET
OORGAUMPET-563 121
PRESENTLY WORKING AT
GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL
AS ASSISTANT MISTRESS
OORGAUMPET, KGF-563 121
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIKANTH M.P., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
by
CHANNEGOWDA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
PREMA
Location: High PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
Court of
Karnataka M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
NEW PUBLIC OFFICES
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001
3. THE DIRECTOR
SECONDARY EDUCATION
NEW PUBLIC OFFICES
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
WP No. 12317 of 2023
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
KOLAR DISTRICT
KOLAR-563 101
5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT
SHIVAMOGGA-577 201
6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER
SHIVAMOGGA TALUK
SHIVAMOGGA-577 201
7. THE PRINCIPAL
GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE
KAMASAMUDRA
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563 129
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2023 PASSED ON APPLICATION
No.2588/2022 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, ANNEXURE-C AND
ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
WP No. 12317 of 2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner as well as learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for the respondents.
2. It is submitted that the petitioner was initially
appointed as Assistant Mistress, Grade-II in Physics in the
Government Upgraded Higher Primary School,
Shivamogga in pursuance of order dated 23.04.2005. On
05.10.2006, she made a representation seeking
permission to take back her testimonials for selection to
the post of Assistant Teacher in Government Junior
College, High School Wing at Kamasamudram, KGF. It is
submitted that no reply was received. Though the
petitioner had made a further representation on
18.11.2006 requesting for permission to appear in the
examination with regard to selection the same was also
not attended. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in the
examination and in pursuance to an order dated
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
24.04.2007, she was appointed as Assistant Teacher in
Government Junior College, High School Wing at
Kamasamudram, KGF. Thereafter, the representation was
made to the Deputy Director for Public Instructions,
Shivamogga to relieve her from duties which was allowed
and she was relieved from duties subject to certain
conditions as per Annexure - A8 dated 10.05.2007. It is
stated that even after joining duty as Assistant Teacher,
she had made several representations for treating the
period spent by her as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) for
qualifying service. However, the same was not taken into
account. She thereafter, made a consolidated
representation on 27.05.2022 and when no response was
received to the same, she had approached the Tribunal. It
is submitted that in the application preferred before the
Tribunal, the petitioner had specifically raised a ground
that the provisions of Rule 252 (b) of the Karnataka Civil
Services Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the KCSR' for
short), provides that resignation of an appointment to take
up, with proper permission, another appointment, service
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
in which counts, would not entail forfeiture of past service
and that she would be entitled to count her prior service
for pension. However, the Tribunal held that Annexure -
A7 contained the condition that the petitioner's prior
services would not be counted as of right and that
submission of representations would not be of any help to
the petitioner. It was held that the representations
submitted by the petitioner were belated and that the
petitioner had submitted a resignation, which was
accepted by the authorities. It was held that the
Government had not permitted the applicant either to
appear for examination or for selection to the post of
Assistant Teacher and therefore, the claim raised for
counting the earlier period of service was not in
accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend
that the provisions of Rule 252 (b) of the KCSR are clear
and that the petitioner having been permitted to take up
the appointment as Assistant Teacher was entitled to
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
count the earlier period of service also. It is submitted
that the said provision was not considered by the Tribunal.
It is further submitted that Rule 54 of the General
Recruitment Rules, 1977 also specifically provides for NOC
to be procured from the earlier Department to be
produced for appointment in the latter Department. It is
therefore contended that such procedure which is
mandatory in cases of appointment of a person working in
Government service to another post in the same
department or any other department would amount to
proper permission as provided under Rule 252 (b) of the
KCSR.
4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents would contend that it is the contention of the
respondents that the petitioner had not obtained
permission for appearing for the examination for
appointment to the latter post. It is submitted that though
such a request was made by the petitioner, no permission
as such had been granted by the Department. It is further
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
submitted that Annexure - A8 would show that the
petitioner had been permitted to join the latter post on
specific conditions, one of which was that, she would have
no claim for counting of the earlier service as a matter of
right. It is therefore contended that the view taken by the
Tribunal cannot be found to be perverse which would
warrant interference by this Court in exercise the power of
judicial review.
5. Having considered the contentions advanced, we
notice that Rule 252 (b) of the KCSR specifically provides
for a permission to take up another appointment, service
in which counts for the purpose of pension. In the instant
case, the respondents had raised a contention that
petitioner had not obtained specific permission to appear
for the examination. However, there is no plea raised
before the Tribunal that the petitioner had not obtained
permission for appointment in the latter post or that the
resignation would not come within a purview of Rule 252
(b) of the KCSR. The petitioner had also raised
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
contentions before the Tribunal to the effect that other
identically situated persons had been granted the benefit
of counting of prior service also for the purpose of
qualifying service for pension.
6. Having considered the contentions advanced and
in view of the fact that the petitioner had produced before
the Tribunal, the representations that she had made and
as also the communications made by the institution, where
the petitioner was subsequently appointed to the
Government, we are of the opinion that the finding of the
Tribunal that the claim of the petitioner was belated,
cannot be accepted. It is clear that the petitioner had
accepted the position that she could not claim the prior
service as a matter of right. However, she had made
several representations before the Department seeking
counting of the prior service rendered by her. In the light
of specific provisions of Rule 252 (b) of the KCSR, we are
of the opinion that the said representations made by the
petitioner deserve favourable consideration in view of the
NC: 2024:KHC:30799-DB
fact that the respondents did not have a case before the
Tribunal or indeed before this Court that it was without
obtaining permission from the competent authorities that
the petitioner had taken up second appointment as
Assistant Teacher in the Government Junior College.
7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The
order of the Tribunal shall stand set aside. The
respondents are directed to take up representations
preferred by the petitioner and grant her the benefits of
counting of past service in terms of Rule 252 (b) of the
KCSR. Appropriate action shall be taken within a period of
three months from today.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
MH/-
