Partly allowed

Smt. Seeta D/O Kushappa Bajaguli v. the Deputy Commissioner

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2023WP/104687/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired instructor, approached the High Court via writ petition seeking wages for promotion benefits allegedly denied due to non-clearance of departmental exams. The court noted she actually cleared exams in 2007. Ordered reconsideration.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus was issued directing respondents to consider the petitioner's case for grant of promotion or benefits withheld due to alleged non-clearance of Departmental Examinations within three months.

Smt. Seeta D/O Kushappa Bajaguli Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 104687 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SEETA D/O KUSHAPPA BAJAGULI, AGE. 73 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED TAILORING, TRAINING INSTRUCTOR, R/O. KUMBAR ONI, JAYARAM CHAL, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI & SMT. POOJA SAVADATTI, ADVOCATES)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KODIBHAG, KARWAR, UTTARA KANNADA-581301.

¶13

VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL

¶14

Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Date: 2023.09.22 10:53:08 +0530

¶15

THE DISTRICT OFFICER, BACKWAR CLASS WELFARE DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO.001, OFFICE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KODIBHAG, KARWAR, UTTARA KANNADA-581301.

¶16

THE TALUKA BACKWARD CLASS WELFARE OFFICER, TALUKA OFFICE HONNAVARA, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA-581334.

¶17

… RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, AGA FOR R1-R3)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICELS 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR A DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE WAGES OF RS.3,93,284/- WITH INTEREST AS PER ANNEXURE-D TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is before this Court seeks a direction by issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the arrears of wages on grant of the benefits of promotion which the petitioner claims to be entitled too, as the petitioner has retired closed to 13 years ago.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel Smt. Pooja Savadatti

¶25

appearing on behalf of Shri R.H. Angadi for petitioner and the learned AGA Shri M.M. Khannur appearing for the respondents – State.

¶26

The petitioner joins the services of the Tailoring Training Center run by the State Government in the Department of Backward Classes on 01.10.1986. During the period of her service, she has been representing to the respondents for grant of the benefits of additional increments or promotion as the case would be. Every time her request has been turned down on the score that the petitioner has not cleared the Departmental Examinations

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶28

¶29

for grant of such promotion or any other benefit. It is non consideration of the representation of the petitioner for grant of such benefits, is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

¶30

Learned counsel Smt. Pooja Savadatti

¶31

appearing for the petitioner would seek to contend that the petitioner has been denied the promotion or the benefits of such promotion only on the score that the petitioner has not cleared the Departmental examinations. The petitioner had cleared the same on 11.06.2007. Later the petitioner retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 01.10.2007. Learned counsel takes this Court through the documents appended to the petition to demonstrate that the petitioner has indeed cleared the Departmental Examinations on 11.06.2007, long before her retirement, on attaining the age of superannuation, and therefore seeks a direction be issued by issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus.

¶32

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶33

Learned AGA would submit that if the petitioner

¶34

has cleared the Departmental Examinations, which was a necessary requisite for grant of any promotion or promotion benefits now the petitioner has produced the documents of such clearance, the case of the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders would be passed thereon, within a reasonable time.

¶35

The said submission is placed on record.

¶36

It is not in dispute that the entitlement of the petitioner for grant of promotion to the next higher cadre or the benefits of such promotion in terms of the Rules was on clearance of the Departmental Examinations. The Departmental Examinations was allegedly not cleared by the petitioner according to the State. The petitioner has appended the certificate issued by the Karnataka Public Service Commission, which depicts that the petitioner has cleared the necessary Departmental Examination for consideration of grant of such promotion. The petitioner

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶38

has retired from service long ago it is not the case that she has not been knocking at the doors of the respondents as the clearance certificate of examiantion was available with the respondents on 11.06.2007 itself long before the retirement. Therefore, the entitlement of the petitioner ought to have been considered in the tune with the certificate that was already before it. A deeper delving into the rights of the petitioner at this juncture would be unnecessary as the learned AGA submits that the case of the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders would be passed thereon.

¶39

Therefore, for the aforesaid reasons, the

¶40

following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) The petition is allowed in part.

¶43

(ii) Mandamus issues to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of grant of promotion or benefits

¶44

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10906 WP No. 104687 of 2023

¶45

of such promotion to the next higher cadre,

¶46

which is withheld only on the ground that

¶47

the petitioner had not cleared the

¶48

Departmental Examinations.

¶49

(iii) The action shall be taken within a period of

¶50

three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, if not earlier.

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

VNP*/ct:bck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Smt. Seeta D/O Kushappa Bajaguli v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Seeta D/O Kushappa Bajaguli v. the Deputy Commissioner

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

M/S. United Global Corporation Limited Vs the State by Indiranagara Police

John Thariam Thaliath Vs Vamshidhar Myneni

Shashikumar @ Sashi Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashok Rudragouda Patil Vs the Managing Director

Smt. Arati Suresh Hulikoppe Vs Shri. Vasantrao Ganapatro Deshmukh

Ajatanagaling S/O Veerabadrappa Badiger Vs the State of Karnataka