Disposed

D Sharanappa v. the Principal Secretary

Karnataka HC23 Mar 2023WP/59937/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging non-release of salary grant under recruitment seniority basis filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Court directed third respondent to consider petitioner's grievance and mandated filing of a fresh representation within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh representation within one month; Third respondent directed to consider the grievance in accordance with law.

D Sharanappa Vs the Principal Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 59937 of 2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 59937 OF 2014 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

D. SHARANAPPA S/O DANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC:ASSISTANT TEACHER, WORKING AT: PRIYADARSHINI, HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, NAYAKANAHATTI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR G M.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, NEW PUBLIC OFFICES, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD

¶16

¶17

WP No. 59937 of 2014

¶18

BANGALURU - 560 001.

¶19

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, CHITRADURGA DISTRCT CHITRADURGA – 577 522.

¶20

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DIST, CHITRADURGA – 577 522.

¶21

SRI PRIYADARSHINI EDUCATION TRUST, NAYAKANAHATTI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DIST, CHITRADURGA – 577 536.

¶22

SRI R PRAKASH S/O RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC:ASSISTANT TEACHER, WORKING AT PRIYADARSHINI HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, NAYAKANAHATTI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA – 577 536.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. T.P. SRINIVAS, PRL GA FOR R1-R4; SRI. M.S. PARTHA SARATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R5;

¶25

VIDE ORDER DATED 21.11.2016 PETITION STANDS ABATED AS AGAINST R6)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE

¶27

¶28

WP No. 59937 of 2014

¶29

PETITIONER IN TERMS OF THE RECRUITMENT SENIORITY BASIS AND RELEASE THE SALARY GRANTS IN HIS FAVOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT PROCEEDINGS DATED 03.11.2011 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.

¶30

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶33

The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to release of salary grant by the respondent - authority. In that view of the matter, petitioner has approached the respondent - authority as per Annexure-M dated 07.06.2014 and respondent having not considered the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶34

Having taken note of the petition averments, I am of the view that the respondent is required to consider the grievance of the petitioner. Accordingly, the third respondent herein is directed to consider the grievance urged by the petitioner as per Annexure-M to the writ petition, at the earliest. However, taking into consideration that the said representation is of the year 2014, petitioner is directed to make one more

¶35

¶36

WP No. 59937 of 2014

¶37

representation to the third respondent herein, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. If such a representation is made, respondent No.3 shall consider the same in accordance with law and outcome of the same be made known to the petitioner.

¶38

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶39

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶40

SD/JUDGE

¶41

sac

D Sharanappa v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D Sharanappa v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Manjunatha R Vs the State of Karnataka

H R Dheemanth Vs Mysore Electrical Industries Ltd.

Sowmya Kumari D Vs the State of Karnataka

Ramesh Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Smt. Chandrakala, Vs the Union of India

Dr v T Banu Vs Managing Director