Dismissed

State of Karnataka the Prn Secretary Higher Educ Educ Deprt M S Building 6TH Fioor Bangaluru v. Subhas

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2023WA/100120/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal by the State challenged a Single Judge's order directing consideration of prior aided institution service for pension computation. The High Court set aside the appeal, clarifying that respondents must account for the New Pension Scheme effective 01.04.2006 while complying with the lower order within three months.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was set aside and disposed of. The State is directed to consider the respondent's claim pursuant to Rule 224-B, taking prior service into account, while bearing in mind the New Pension

State of Karnataka the Prn Secretary… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO. 100120 OF 2022 (S-R)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE PRINACIPAL SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, 6^TH FIOOR, BANGALURU-560001.

¶10

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (EXPENDITURE), FINANCE DEPARTMENT, BANGALURU-560001.

¶11

…APPELLANTS

¶12

(BY SRI. G.K.HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

K M SOMASHEKAR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH 2023.10.16 10:48:36 +0530

¶15

SUBHAS S/O. HANAMANTH BHAJANTRI AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O. PLOT NO.115, BEHIND NSF 3^RD CROSS, SATISH NAGAR, GOKAK-591307, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. SANJAY CHANAL, ADVOCATE)

¶18

WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING THIS HONBLE COURT TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP.NO.101954/2021 (S-R) DATED 19.05.2021, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶19

THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This intra-court appeal by the State is directed against the impugned order dated 19.05.2021 passed in W.P. No.101954/2021 whereby the said petition filed by the respondent was allowed by the learned Single Judge.

¶23

Heard the learned Government Advocate and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

¶24

The material on record discloses that respondent was appointed as a Teacher in a Government Aided institution viz., Sree Kadusiddeshwar Education Institution at Maradimath, on 28.01.2003 and subsequently, he was appointed as Teacher in a Government Higher Primary School, by order dated 29.06.2007. Thereafter, respondent was relieved from the said aided institution on 05.07.2007 and the respondent reported to duty at Government Higher Primary School on 06.07.2007. Thereafter, the respondent submitted a representation on 05.07.2009, within the

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶26

stipulated period of three years as prescribed under Rule 224-B of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules and called upon the appellants to add his previous service rendered in aided institution for the purpose of computation of pension. The said request of the respondent having been rejected by the appellant by issuing the impugned endorsement dated 15.10.2011, the respondent approached this Court in W.P. No.101954/2021 which was allowed by the impugned order dated 19.05.2021 which is assailed in the present petition.

¶27

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of appeal and referring to the material on record, the learned Government Advocate for

¶28

the appellants invited our attention to the impugned endorsement dated 15.10.2011 at Annexure-G, in order to point out that the respondent having joined the government service as a Teacher in the Government Higher Primary School only on 29.06.2007, the pension Rules that existed prior to 01.04.2006 were not applicable to the respondent and this aspect of the matter has not been considered by

¶29

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶30

the learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order

¶31

which deserves to be set aside.

¶32

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would support the impugned order and submit that there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶33

A perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge will indicate that by quashing the impugned endorsement dated 15.10.2011, the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants to consider the claim in terms of Rule 224-B of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules by holding as under:

¶34

"Learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶35

2. The petitioner was appointed as Teacher on 28.01.2003 at Government Aided institution and thereafter, he was appointed as Teacher on 29.06.2007 in Government Higher Primary School. The petitioner was relieved from the institution on 05.07.2007. The petitioner submitted representation to respondent No.1 on 05.07.2009 so as to reckon

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶38

the prior service rendered by him in the private aided institution for the purpose of fixing the pension and pensionary benefits. However, respondent No.1 has rejected the said representation. Hence, this writ petition.

¶39

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of Rule 224-B of Karnataka Civil Services Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short), the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of counting the previous service of additional years as qualifying service for pension. Hence, he submits that the endorsement issued by respondent No.1 is contrary to Rule 224-B of the Rules.

¶40

4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents justifies the endorsement issued by respondent No.1. However, he does not dispute that Rule 224-B of the Rules provides for reckoning the previous service rendered by the petitioner in aided institution for the purpose of fixing the pension and pensionary benefits.

¶41

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶42

6. Petitioner was appointed as teacher in private aided institution on 28.01.2003. Thereafter, he was appointed as teacher in Government Higher Primary School and he was relieved from the private

¶43

¶44

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶45

aided Institution on 05.07.2007. After joining the services as teacher in Government Higher Primary School, he submitted a representation to respondent No.1 on 05.07.2009 so as to reckon the prior service rendered by him in private aided institution for the purpose of fixing the pension and pensionary benefits. However, the said representation was rejected by respondent No.1 on the ground that there is no provision for counting the previous service rendered by the petitioner as qualifying service for the purpose of fixing pension and pensionary benefits. Rule 224-B of the Rules specifies that every employee entitled to have the benefit of counting his previous additional service as qualifying service for the purpose of fixing pension and pensionary benefits. The impugned endorsement issued by respondent No.1 rejecting the representation submitted by the petitioner is contrary to Rule 224-B of the Rules. Hence, the impugned endorsement issued by respondent No.1 requires to be quashed. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i) The writ petition is allowed;

¶48

ii) The impugned communication dated 15.10.2011 issued by respondent No.1 at Annexure-G is quashed;

¶49

iii) Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner pursuant to the

¶50

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶51

representation dated 05.07.2009 for counting of his qualifying service for fixing the pension by taking into consideration the prior service rendered by the petitioner in the private aided institution and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶52

Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents is permitted to file memo of appearance within four week."

¶53

As rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate, the applicability of the new pension scheme, which came into force from 01.04.2006 onwards, to the respondent has not been dealt with by the learned Single Judge and as such, the said issue/question/aspect would also necessarily have to be taken into account by the appellants-State while complying with the directions issued by the learned Single Judge.

¶54

Under these circumstances, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge except clarifying that while complying with the directions of the learned Single Judge

¶55

8 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10908-DB WA No. 100120 of 2022

¶56

issued in the impugned order, the appellants-State shall bear in mind the provisions contained in the New Pension Scheme which came into force from 01.04.2006 onwards and proceed to comply with the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶57

Subject to the aforesaid clarification to the impugned order, the appeal stands disposed off.

¶58

Sd JUDGE

¶59

Sd JUDGE

¶60

KMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

State of Karnataka the Prn Secretary Higher Educ Educ Deprt M S Building 6TH Fioor Bangaluru v. Subhas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Karnataka the Prn Secretary Higher Educ Educ Deprt M S Building 6TH Fioor Bangaluru v. Subhas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Gadigeppa S/O Muttappa Hanamar Alias Kuri Vs Sanjeev Kishore

Ksrtc Retired Officers Vs Smt. Arati

Panchaksharayya Pattadayya Hiremath Vs He Land Acquisition Officer and

State of Karnataka the Pri Secretary Higher Educ Deprt M S Building 6TH Floor Bangaluru Vs Rajashekar

The Management of Nwkrtc Vs Shri. Yamanappa S/O Hanamantappa Sungar

P. Chinna Duragappa S/O P. Ankalappa, Since Deceased R/by His Lrs. Vs the State of Karnataka