Allowed

Shekayya Gangayya Hiremath v. Under Secretary

Karnataka HC28 Aug 2020WP/115151/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition challenging a condition in the petitioner's appointment letter that excluded his un-aided period service for pension and leave. In the presence of a pending appeal regarding irrelevant legislation's validity, the Court quashed the specific restrictive condition.

What did the court decide?

Condition No.6 in the appointment letter dated 12.05.2017 was quashed; respondents directed to re-fix emoluments subject to the decision in W.A.No.2476/2015.

Shekayya Gangayya Hiremath Vs Under… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

: 1 : W.P.NO.115151/2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2020

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.115151/2019 (S-RES)

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shekayya Gangayya Hiremath, Age 53 years, Occ: Asst. Teacher, Now working in Shri Renuka Devi High School, Ugargol, Tq.: SAvadatti, Dist.: Belgavi, Pincode – 591 110.

¶9

… Petitioner

¶10

(By Shri S.G. Hiremath, Advocate)

¶11

And:

¶12

Under Secretary, State of Karnataka (Service), Dept. of Education (Pri & SEco.), Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road, Bengaluru-580 001.

¶13

The Upper Commissioner for Public Instructions, Rodda Road, Dharwad-580 008.

¶14

Deputy Director of Public Instructions, Belagavi, Dist. Belgavi-590 001.

¶15

The Administrator, Shri Renuka Yallamma Devastan, Yallamma Gudda, Tq.: Savadatti, Dist.: Belgavi-591 173.

¶16

… Respondents

¶17

(By Shri V.S.Kalasurmath, HCGP for R1-R3; Shri Sunil S.Desai, Advocate for R4)

¶18

W.P.NO.115151/2019

¶19

: 2 :

¶20

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned condition at Sl.No.6 for approval of the appointment of the petitioner by respondent No.2 on 12.05.2017, vide Annexure-D not to consider the service of the petitioner rendered in the Un-aided period for purpose of leave, pension and other benefits pertaining to the petitioner is concerned.

¶21

This petition coming on for Preliminary hearing, this day, the Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for certiorari to quash the condition at Sl.No.6 of the approval of the appointment of the petitioner by respondent No.2 on 12.05.2017, whereunder an embargo has been imposed that the services of the petitioner rendered during the time that the school run by fourth respondent was un-aided would not be taken into consideration for the purpose of consideration of leave, pension and other benefits.

¶24

Shri S.G. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the matter is no longer res-integra inasmuch as this Court vide its order dated 10.07.2015 in W.P.No.21216/2014 and other

¶25

: 3 : W.P.NO.115151/2019

¶26

connected maters has struck down the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulation of Pay, Pension and other Benefits) Act, 2014 as being unconstitutional and had directed the respondent-State to make payments of monetary benefits in parity with the payments made to the teachers working in Government Institutions and on this ground he submits that the petition ought to be allowed and condition No.6 is to be quashed.

¶27

Per contra, Shri V.S.Kalasurmath, learned HCGP for the respondents would submit that the said order of this Court had been challenged in W.A.No.2476/2015, which is pending and therefore, no orders are required to be passed in the present proceedings.

¶28

Heard Shri S.G. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri V.S. Kalasurmath, learned HCGP for the respondents. Perused the papers.

¶29

: 4 : W.P.NO.115151/2019

¶30

I have perused the order passed in

¶31

W.A.No.2476/2015, it is seen that while issuing notice on the said writ appeal, the Division Bench of this Court had recorded the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying the current emoluments in terms of re-fixation, subject, however, to the result of the writ appeal, this Court having also restrained the respondents from initiating any recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of pay.

¶32

In view of the same, I am of the considered view that the above petition is to be allowed and condition No.6 in the appointment letter dated 12.05.2017 (annexure-D) is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to re-fix the emoluments and entitlement of the petitioner and make payment of the same, which shall be subject however to the decision of this Court in W.A.No.2476/2015.

¶33

W.P.NO.115151/2019

¶34

: 5 :

¶35

7. The petition is accordingly allowed.

¶36

SD/JUDGE

¶37

Vnp*

Shekayya Gangayya Hiremath v. Under Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shekayya Gangayya Hiremath v. Under Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.T.M. Sanna Kotraiah S/O Shivamurthaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Paravva W/O Venkatesh Kuduva Vs State of Karnataka

Krishna S/O Devappa Naik Vs the State of Karnataka

Sacred Heart Education Institution Vs the Deputy Director of

Sri.Rudragouda S/O Shekaragouda Meti Vs the State of Karnataka

Sajid @ Mohammed Sajid Vs the State of Karnataka