Dismissed

G S Panchakshari v. the Chief Personnel Manager

Karnataka HC3 Oct 2012WP/20627/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions filed by conductors challenging the fixation of their seniority. The court held that seniority was correctly fixed from the date of voluntary transfer request, as petitioners voluntarily opted for transfer, losing prior seniority. Petitions dismissed.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the endorsement fixing seniority from the date of voluntary transfer was upheld.

G S Panchakshari Vs the Chief Personnel… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

W.P.NOs.20627-628/2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶4

DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2012

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH B ADI WRIT PETITION Nos.20627-20628/2012 (S-PRO)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

1 G S PANCHAKSHARI S/O G S SHIVALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

¶9

WORKING AS CONDUCTOR BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, DEPOT NO.4 B M T C, BANGALORE

¶10

2 M SHIVASHANKAR S/O LATE G A MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS WORKING AS CONDUCTOR, 7TH DEPOT B M T C, BANGALORE, R/AT NO.3/39, NEW NO.263, 4TH CROSS, 4TH STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARNAGAR, BANGALORE-560079

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

( BY SRI. K.HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, ADV.,)

¶13

AND:

¶14

1 THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN CENTRAL OFFICES SHANTHINAGAR K H ROAD BANGALORE-560027

¶15

W.P.NOs.20627-628/2012

¶16

¶17

2 THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER BLORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION CENTRAL OFFICES SHANTHINAGAR K H ROAD BANGALORE-560027

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

( BY SRI. H.R.RENUKA, ADV.,)

¶20

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 9.5.2012 AS CONTAINED VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT AND DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO PROMOTE THE PETITIONERS TO THE POSTS OF TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS WITH EFFECT FROM 13.8.2011, THE DATE ON WHICH SIMILARLY PLACED EMPLOYEE T.S. SHIVANANDA WAS PROMOTED AS TRAFFIC CONTROLLER BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION.

¶21

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

In these writ petitions, petitioners have sought for quashing of the endorsement dated 09.05.2012 produced at Annexure-A and they also sought for direction to respondent No.2 to promote them to the posts of traffic controller with effect from 13.08.2011 on par with the similarly placed employee viz., one T.S.Shivananda.

¶24

Facts, which are not in dispute, are that, both the petitioners were appointed as conductors on 08.06.1976 and

¶25

W.P.NOs.20627-628/2012

¶26

¶27

31.10.1975 respectively. On bifurcation, their services were transferred to the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation(BMTC). As per Annexure-B, in case of the employee opting for transfer to BMTC on its formation, their seniority would be protected. However, the Corporation without considering the seniority of the petitioners have given promotion to one T.S.Shivananda as traffic controller. Though these petitioners are senior to him. Further, the Corporation has issued endorsement at Annexure-A interalia stating that the petitioners' seniority is protected as per the regulations.

¶28

It is not in dispute that, though the petitioners were appointed as conductors on 08.06.1976 and 31.10.1975, however, petitioner No.1 made a request for transfer on 03.07.1984, accordingly he was transferred from KSRTC to BTS. Petitioner No.2 also made similar request for transfer on 18.02.1984, accordingly he was transferred from KSRTC to BTS. At the time of transfer, their seniority was fixed from the date of entering into the service of BTS i.e., 03.07.1984 and 18.02.1984 as the transfer of both the petitioners was based on their request.

¶29

W.P.NOs.20627-628/2012

¶30

¶31

However, there was bifurcation of Corporation into three separate Corporation in 1997. Accordingly, as per Annexure-B options were called for from the employees working in KSRTC asking their willingness to go to other Corporation and in case, the employees opting for such option their earlier seniority was protected.

¶32

In this case, as far as seniority of the petitioners in BTS, which become BMTC, same is protected from the date of entering into the said Corporation. The grievance of the petitioners is that their seniority has to fixed from 08.06.1976 and 31.10.1975 i.e., the date of entering into the services. But same can not be granted as the petitioners had lost their seniority, when they sought for request for transfer, once they got the transferred on request, they go below the last man in the same cadre in the transfer Corporation, and accordingly their seniority is fixed.

¶33

Annexure –B is applicable in respect of formation of three new Corporations thereafter. It is not a case of the petitioners that their seniority is disturbed on account of bifurcation or formation of new Corporations. The petitioners

¶34

W.P.NOs.20627-628/2012

¶35

¶36

on their violation have sought for transfer and accordingly they were transferred and their seniority is fixed, and there is no error in the same. Hence, I find there is no error in fixation of the seniority of the petitioners.

¶37

Accordingly, these petitions fail and same are dismissed.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

PMR*

G S Panchakshari v. the Chief Personnel Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G S Panchakshari v. the Chief Personnel Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Vxl Instruments Ltd. Vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Deputy Conservator of Forests Vs Dundaiah S/O Chikkamadegowda

The Karnataka Bank Limited, Vs Sri S M Terdal

Sri Dhamendra Kumar T P Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri R Kalairasan Vs the Deputy Inspector of Police

G R Chandrashekara B.A. B.Ed., Vs the State of Karnataka