[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Chuni Lal vs Central Silk Board on 11 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
WP No. 6418 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 6418 OF 2026 (L-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI CHUNI LAL
S/O PEENGI RAM,
AGED 58 YEARS,
WORKING AS SFW(TS),
CENTRAL SILK BOARD,
RESEARCH EXTENSION CENTRE,
LAMBERI, R/AT C/O MUDALAIAH,
NO.121-A, 10TH 'B' CROSS,
SHANTHI GARDEN,
MUDULAPALYA,
Digitally signed BENGALURU- 560 072.
by
SHARADAVANI ...PETITIONER
B
Location: HIGH (BY SRI. NAIK V S., ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. CENTRAL SILK BOARD,
BTM LAYOUT, MADIWALA,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
WP No. 6418 of 2026
HC-KAR
2. THE DIRECTOR,
CENTRAL SERICULTURAL RESEARCH
AND TRAINING INSTITUTE,
CENTRAL SILK BOARD, PAMPORE,
JAMMU AND KASHMIR-191 121
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.N.S.NARASIMHA SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS AND GRANT THE
PETITIONER THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS: (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR
DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER
THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 31.01.2026
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND CONTINUE THE SERVICES OF
THE PETITIONER AS SKILLED FARM WORKER (TS) TILL HE
ATTAINS THE AGE OF 60 YEARS TO MEET THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
WP No. 6418 of 2026
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus to direct
the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation
dated 31.01.2026 to continue in service under the respondents
till the petitioner completes the age of 60 years, which
according to the petitioner is the age of superannuation.
2. The petitioner had filed the petition in the light of
the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in
Central Silk Board vs Employees Union of Central Silk
Board & Another1 wherein, in terms of the order dated
04.09.2024, this Court has dismissed the petition filed by first
respondent-Central Silk Board and confirmed the award passed
by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour
Court.
3. In terms of the award dated 01.04.2013, the
Tribunal has held that age of superannuation of the Timescale
Farm Workers of the respondent establishment would be 60
years and not 55 years as contended by the respondents.
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court
confirming the award passed by the Tribunal is not questioned
by the respondents and it has attained finality.
5. Thus, the learned counsel would submit that the
petitioner cannot be superannuated at the age of 58, and the
petitioner is entitled to continue as the employee of first
respondent till the petitioner completes 60 years.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit
that though the Board of first respondent has passed a
resolution to implement the order, with effect from the date of
the order passed in Central Silk Board supra, the Board is yet
to receive the approval from the Union of India for the decision
taken by the Board. It is further submitted that since
respondents are awaiting the decision of Union of India, from
the perspective of the respondents, the award passed by the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal has not yet attained
finality.
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
HC-KAR
7. This Court has considered the contentions raised at
the bar and perused the records.
8. It is not in dispute that the award passed by the
Tribunal enhancing the age of retirement to 60 years from 55
years is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Central Silk Board supra. It is further not in dispute
that the petitioner is working as Timescale Farm Worker with
first respondent. The petitioner has completed 58 years after
the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming
the award passed by the Tribunal.
9. This being the position, the award passed by the
Tribunal which is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court
comes to the aid of the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled
to the following relief:-
(i) It is declared that the petitioner's age of superannuation
is 60 years.
(ii) The respondents shall not superannuate the petitioner
treating the age of superannuation as 58 years.
NC: 2026:KHC:14762
HC-KAR
(iii) Thus, the petitioner is entitled to continue in employment
as Timescale Farm Worker under first respondent till the
age of superannuation at 60 subject to all the Rules and
Regulations applicable to the employment of the
petitioner.
10. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with
the above observations and findings.
Sd/-
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
JUDGE
VM
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 26
