Writ petition filed for direction to respondents to step up and re-fix the petitioner's pay and pay consequential benefits with interest. Court directed KPTCL to decide representations regarding his pay disparity.
Direction to Respondent No. 2-KPTCL to decide representations and proposal within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.12392/2018 (S - RES)
BETWEEN
RAMANNA S/O HANUMANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RETIRED ACCOUNTS OFFICER, R/O “CHANDANA”, PRAGATINAGARA, JOG ROAD, SAGAR TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DIST. – 577 401.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI VIGHNESHWAR S.SHASTRI, ADVOCATE (PHYSICAL HEARING))
AND
2
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VENKAT SATYANARAYAN A., HCGP FOR R1 (PHYSICAL HEARING); SMT.PADMA S.UTTUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3 (VIDEO CONFERENCING)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO STEP UP AND RE-FIX THE PAY OF THE PETITIONER APPROPRIATELY ON PAR WITH SIMILARLY SITUATED EMPLOYEES AND ISSUE DIRECTION TO PAY THE CONSEQENTIAL BENEFITS ACCRUING OUT OF IT WITH INTEREST PAYABLE THEREON.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for
a direction to the respondents to consider his case in
terms of the proposal given by the Executive Engineer
3
to respondent No.2 for grant of stepping up and refixation of pay of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner was appointed as II Grade
Clerk cum Meter Reader on 14.8.1974 and was the beneficiary of several pay revisions upto the year 2002. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner got his third promotion as an Assistant Accounts Officer and his pay was fixed at Rs.11,300/- in the pay scale of Rs.7800-13600.
4
Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Venkat Satyanarayan A, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Smt. Padma S. Uttur, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
would contend that the petitioner ceased to be in employment of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) on account of voluntary retirement on 30.4.2010. Acting on certain representations given by the petitioner, a proposal was sent by the Executive Engineer to respondent No.2-KPTCL to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of stepping up of pay in the light of the fact that his juniors were granted higher pay that of the petitioner.
5
6
Annexure K for stepping up of pay and the order of KPTCL dated 12.09.2007.
respondent No.2-KPTCL to decide the representations
of the petitioner and proposal made by the Executive Engineer to respondent NO.2-KPTCL, in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date
of a copy of this order.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/JUDGE
Cs CT:MJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court ought to direct the KPTCL to reconsider the petitioner's claim for stepping up of pay when his juniors were granted higher pay.
Whether the KPTCL is required to decide the proposal made by the Executive Engineer for paying consequential benefits to the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rannanna
State of Karnataka
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.
Director (Administration and Human Resource)
M. Nagaprasanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
