Petitioner sought quashing of order denying salary grant for Group-D post. Court held he got two posts admitted earlier under 2009 rules allowing only one, making his claim untenable despite 2017 amendment.
Writ petition was dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 13920 OF 2023 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT.SARITHA.A.L., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 4/3/2023 IN NO. C8(1) SHA.SHI.A.MELMANA GROUP D ANU 41/E 869338/2022-23 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER TO GROUP-D POST WITH AID SINCE THE DATE OF APPOINTMENT AND HIM ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS SINCE FROM THE DATE OF APPOINTMENT EXPEDITIOUSLY, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
rejected on the ground that the School already had two group ‘D’ posts and the Rules did not permit admitting a third post to salary grant.
rejecting the petitioner’s claim for salary grant was that there are already two employees, whose posts were admitted to grant in the group ‘D’ cadre.
year 2012 and this has culminated in the impugned endorsement.
for admission of the petitioner’s post for a salary grant was rejected on the ground that the Institution had
already two posts admitted to salary grant, it was obvious that the amendment which came into being in the year 2017 will not be applicable and the case of the petitioner would have to be decided only in accordance with the Rules which prevailed as of 2009.
Sd/- JUDGE
RK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition challenging the refusal of salary grant admission for a Group-D post should be allowed given the restrictions in the rules applicable at the time of the initial proposal.
Whether the 2017 amendment in the Rules applies to a proposal made before that amendment regarding salary grant admission limits.
Whether the petitioner's claim for salary grant is untenable since Rule limits number of admitted posts.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Lokesh T B
State of Karnataka
The Commissioner of Public Instructions
The Block Education Officer
Sri Lokamba Education Institution (R)
N S Sanjay Gowda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
