Karnataka High Court
Shri. Ranganath Gadagakar S/O Sri ... vs The Karnataka Power Corporation ... on 5 March, 2025
Author: S G Pandit
Bench: S G Pandit
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4243-DB
WA No. 100631 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT APPEAL NO.100631 OF 2023 (S-R)
BETWEEN:
SHRI RANGANATH GADAGKAR,
S/O SRI BODHARAO GADAGKAR,
AGE. 72 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED,
PRIVATE SECRETARY TO FINANCE DIRECTOR,
KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,
RES. AT SUVARSHA, 4760/33, 4TH MAIN,
SIRUR PARK, I STAGE, VIDYANAGAR,
HUBLI-580 021.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NARAYAN G. RASALKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION
LIMITED, A GOVERNMENT OF COMPANY
Digitally signed INCORPORATED UNDER THE
by V N BADIGER COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
Location: HIGH HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE,
COURT OF AT NO.82, SHAKTI BHAVAN, 82,
KARNATAKA
RACE COURSE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560001,
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2023
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.79129 OF 2013
BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL & ETC.,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4243-DB
WA No. 100631 of 2023
THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT)
This intra-court appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka
High Court Act, 1961, is directed against the learned Single
Judge's order, dated 22.05.2023, rejecting W.P. No.79129/2013.
2. Heard Sri. Narayan G.Rasalkar, learned counsel for
the appellant and perused the entire writ appeal papers.
3. The appellant/writ petitioner before the learned
Single Judge had questioned the condition prescribed under
communication bearing No.A1P 2G 4387 dated 09.10.2012,
wherein the appellant/petitioner was communicated that his
request for re-examining the issue of pension is not capable for
consideration. The petitioner had also sought for a direction to
the respondent-Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) to
extend the pension scheme as formulated under Annexure-G
i.e., the Karnataka Power Corporation Limited Employees
Pension Scheme, 2002 (for short 'KPCL Pension Scheme') and to
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4243-DB
pay the pension with effect from 31.03.1998 with all
consequential benefits.
4. The appellant/petitioner joined the services of
respondent-KPCL as a Stenographer and, at the time of his
voluntary retirement on 31.03.1998 was Private Secretary to
Finance Director. It is an admitted fact that the
appellant/petitioner was governed under the provisions of the
Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,
1952. There was no separate pension scheme as on the date of
petitioner's retirement from the respondent-KPCL. In the year
1983, the respondent-KPCL with an intention to introduce
Pension Scheme, called option from its employees, but the
petitioner, who was a member of CPF Scheme, failed to exercise
his option to join the KPCL Pension Scheme. Having not opted for
KPCL Pension Scheme, the petitioner continued to be member
under the CPF Scheme. In the year 1996, the petitioner
requested permission to join the KPCL Pension Scheme and in
the meanwhile, on 31.03.1998, the appellant/petitioner took
voluntary retirement from the respondent-KPCL. On his
voluntary retirement, he availed retirement benefit under the
CPF Scheme with interest.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4243-DB
5. It is pertinent to note that the KPCL Pension Scheme
came into effect from 31.03.2003 and the appellant/petitioner
had retired from service long before coming into force of KPCL
Pension Scheme. The appellant/petitioner was before this Court
in W.P. No.24637/2005 against the rejection of his request to
extend the benefit of KPCL Pension Scheme and the said writ
petition came to be dismissed, against which the petitioner filed
writ appeal and this Court directed the respondent-KPCL to
consider the representation of the appellant/petitioner. The
respondent-KPCL considered the appellant/petitioner's request
subject to certain conditions, extended the benefit of KPCL
Pension Scheme, and the appellant/petitioner agreeing to all the
conditions, availed the pension with effect from 01.04.2011.
Having agreed for all the conditions and after receiving the
pension, it is not open for the appellant/petitioner to turn around
and question the conditions imposed by the respondent-KPCL
while admitting him to KPCL Pension Scheme. Moreover, the
KPCL Pension Scheme was not in existence as on the date of
appellant/petitioner's retirement. However, on humanitarian
grounds, after relaxing certain conditions, the
appellant/petitioner was admitted to KPCL Pension Scheme.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4243-DB
6. Admittedly, KPCL Pension Scheme has come into
effect from 31.03.2023. The appellant/petitioner was admitted to
KPCL Pension Scheme with effect from 01.04.2011. Therefore,
the prayer of the petitioner to extend the KPCL Pension Scheme
from the date of his retirement i.e., 31.03.1998 cannot be
considered since as on that date, the scheme itself had not come
into effect.
7. The writ appeal is devoid of merits and accordingly,
the writ appeal stands rejected. This is a fit case for imposing
the costs for the conduct of the petitioner/appellant, but since
the petitioner/appellant is a retired employee, we refrain from
imposing any costs.
Pending I.As., do not survive for consideration and the
same are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(S G PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
KMS, ct:vp
