Allowed

Smt Premalatha B R v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Mar 2023WP/997/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by Assistant Professors seeking two advance increments. Relying on Central Government directions and ICAR approvals regarding professional degrees, the Court directed the State and University to grant the increments within a prescribed period.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; Directed respondent-Government and University to reconsider the grievance and grant two non-compounded advance increments within a fixed period.

Smt Premalatha B R Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

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

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.997 OF 2019 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PREMALATHA B R W/O T. R. SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF AGRONOMY COH BENGALURU.

¶9

DR. JYOTHI KATTEGOUDAR W/O RAVIKUMAR S. A. AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF VSC COH BENGALURU.

¶10

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

¶11

MR. PADMANABHA K. S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTNAT PROFESSOR DIVISION OF VEGETABLE SCIENCES, IARI, PUSA, NEW DLEHI-110012.

¶12

DR. JAYASHREE UGALATH W/O CHANDRASHEKAR HARDHARI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF BIOCHEMISTRY DEPT OF BCI COH BENGALURU

¶13

¶14

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶15

MR. SHRIKANTH H S S/O SUBRAYA GOWDA H. J. AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF FSC COH BENGALURU.

¶16

MR. B. S. LAXMANA REDDY S/O B. N. SRINIVASA REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF AGRIL EXTENSION, C O H BENGALURU.

¶17

DR. SHWETHA B. S. W/O D ITIGI PRABHKAR AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF AGRIL EXTENSION, RHREC BENGALURU.

¶18

MR. NAGARAJA G. S/O GUDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF AGRIL ENGINEERING RHREC BENGALURU.

¶19

MR. RAJENDRA B. N. S/O NAGENDRAPPA B N AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, WORKING AS ASST PROF OF FRUIT SCIENCE HREC HOGALAGERE SRINIVASAPUR.

¶20

MR. POTTAPPA K. S/O KADIRAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS WORKING AS ASST PROF DEPARTMENT OF AGRIL EXTESNION COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE GKUK, BENGALURU.

¶21

¶22

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶23

MR. SUDARSHAN G K S/O KEMPEGWODA G. D. AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, OF PLANT PATHOLOGY COH MYSURU.

¶24

MRS. RASHMI H. B. W/O DR. LOKEHS B. L. AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF PHT COH MYSURU.

¶25

MR. VENKATESH S. C. S/O CHINNEGOWDA S. D. AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF BIOTECHNOLOGY AND CROP IMPROVEMENT COH MYSURU.

¶26

MR. HARISH B S S/O B. C. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF PMA COH MYSURU.

¶27

MR. SIDDAPPA R. S/O RACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR HRS ARSIKERE NOW ON 3 YEARS DEPUTATION FOR PHD PG HOSTEL, ROOM NO.137, TAMIL NADU AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY COIMBATORE-641003.

¶28

DR. NAGARAJ S/O SHANKAR NAIK AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

¶29

¶30

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶31

WORKING AS ASST. PROFESSOR SCI HORTICULTURE KVK KOLAR.

¶32

MRS. JAYALAKSHMI PAWAR W/O VILAS AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF AGRIL EXTENSION, COH, KOLAR.

¶33

RAJESH A M S/O KESHAVA BHAT ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (FLA) COH TAMAKA KOLAR.

¶34

DR. NOORULLA HAVERI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR PLANT PATHOLOGY ICAR KVK COH NH-75 TAMAKA

¶35

KOLAR-563103.

¶36

…PETITIONERS

¶37

(BY SRI. SUVARNA LAKSHMI M. L., ADVOCATE)

¶38

AND:

¶39

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶40

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶41

UNIVERSITY OF HORTICULTURAL SCIENCES UDAYANAGIRI NAVANAGAR

¶42

BAGALKOT-587104.

¶43

…RESPONDENTS

¶44

(BY SRI. M.S. NAGARAJA, AGA FOR R1;

¶45

SRI L. VENKATARAMA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶46

¶47

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶48

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER/ OFFICE NOTE DATED 19.06.2017 (UNDER ANNEXURE-K TO THE WRIT PETITION) ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT AND RESOLUTION IN PROCEEDINGS DATED 22.02.2018 OF THE 24TH AND 25TH CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF FARM UNIVERSITIES OF KARNATAKA HELD ON 11.03.2016 AND 08.03.2017 INSOFAR AS IT CONCERNS ITEM-8 (UNDER ANNEXURE-L TO THE WRIT PETITION) BY ISSUE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO FORTHWITH GRANT TWO ADVANCE INCREMENTS TO THE PETITIONERS FROM THE DATE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE ENTRY AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN THE 2ND RESPONDENT/UNIVERSITY.

¶49

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

¶50

ORDER

¶51

Heard learned counsel appearing for parties.

¶52

In this writ petition, petitioners are calling in question, the Office Note dated 19.06.2017 (Annexure - K to the writ petition), inter alia they sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant two advance increments to

¶53

¶54

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶55

the petitioners from the date of their entry as Assistant Professor in the second respondent - University.

¶56

Heard Smt. Suvarna Lakshmi M.L., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. M.S. Nagaraja, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri. L. Venkataramareddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶57

The case of the petitioners herein is, that at the time of appointing the petitioners in the respondent - University, it was declared that the petitioners are governed by the Orders, Ordinances, Statutes and Regulations of the respondent - University and they being fresh appointees, would be covered under the newly defined Contributory Pension Scheme as per Govt. Order dated 31.03.2006 as amended from time to time. In terms of the said Govt. Order, petitioners are entitled to certain incentives. Accordingly, the petitioners made a claim for two advance increments. The said claim was rejected by the respondent - University. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have presented this writ petition.

¶58

¶59

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶60

In this regard, I have carefully considered Clause 13 of the Govt. Order dated 24.03.2010. In terms of Clause 13 (iii), the persons who possess post graduate degree in a professional course recognised by a statutory body or Council shall also be entitled to two non compounded advance increments at the entry level. The petitioners herein claim to have entered service pursuant to employment Notification and their orders of appointment are governed by Govt. Order dated 24.03.2010. In similar situation, this Court, in W.P. No.201652/2019 disposed of on 09.02.2022, at paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said Judgment held as under:

¶61

"4. The issued raised in this petition is similar to the one raised and considered by this Court in Writ Petition No.201448 of 2021 which petition came to be disposed of by a separate order today. In the said writ petition it is observed thus:

¶62

'By taking note of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioners herein are the teaching staff of various Universities holding post-graduate degree. The Government of India, by letter dated 31st December, 2008 addressed to the University Grants Commission to extend the said benefit to professional course such as LL.M./M.Tech. etc.

¶63

¶64

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶65

recognised by the relevant Statutory Body/Council. As per Annexure-D, ICAR by letter dated 06th March, 2009, at Clause 4.2 held as follows:

¶66

"4.2 Candidates who hold M.Phil/M.Tech/ M.Sc.(Ag.)/M.V.Sc. M.F.Sc. degree (with 4 years bachelor and 2 years master's programme) at the time of recruitment on or after 01.09.2008 as Scientist shall be given to non-compounded advance increments."

¶67

Perusal of the Government Order dated 24th March, 2010 (Annexure-E) stipulates that the said incentive is extended to those who possessed Post Graduate Degree in a professional course recognised by the relevant Statutory Body/Council. In this regard, the University Grants Commission, following the directions of the Central Government, by its letter dated 30th June, 2010, extended the said benefit to the Teaching Staff who possessed Post Graduate Degree in professional course.

¶68

The ICAR, by its letter dated 06th October, 2016 (Annexure-G) has approved that Under-Graduate Degrees in Agriculture and allied subjects like (Agriculture, Horticulture, Agricultural Engineering, Dairy Technology, Forestry, Veterinary and Animal Science, Food Technology, Bio Technology, Fisheries, Sericulture, Home/ Community Science and Food Nutrition and Dietics) as Professional Degree Courses. It is evident from the aforementioned order passed by the

¶69

¶70

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶71

ICAR that the discipline referred to above be considered as Professional Degree Courses and therefore, the benefit which had been extended by University Grants Commission is to be extended to the teaching staff of the aforementioned Professional Degree Courses. In this regard, recommendation has been made to the Government to take appropriate decision in the matter. It is also borne from the records that the Department of Finance has accorded permission to extend the said benefit to the similarly placed teaching staff of the aforementioned discipline. In that view of the matter, the endorsement Annexure-V dated 22nd February, 2021 issued by the respondent-University is contrary to the decision taken by the Ministry of Human Resource Development and University Grants Commission. I have also noticed that this Court, in Writ Petition No.32248 of 2014 and connected writ petitions decided on 24th July, 2019, quashed the similar endorsement issued by Principal Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department. In the result, the endorsement Annexure-V dated 22 February, 2021 is quashed and respondent-Government is directed to reconsider the grievance of the petitioners for extending two non- compounded advanced increments at the entry level, in terms of the discussion made above.'

¶72

This petition is also liable to be allowed with similar observations. Accordingly writ petition is allowed. The respondent-Government is directed to reconsider the grievance of the petitioners for extending two noncompounded advance increments at the entry level. The

¶73

10 -

¶74

WP No. 997 of 2019

¶75

same shall be done by the respondent-Government at the earliest, and in any event, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Order."

¶76

Following the aforementioned order passed by this Court and applying same to the present case, wherein the petitioners herein are also governed by Clause 13 of the Govt. Order dated 24.03.2010, respondent No.3 is directed to reconsider its view and pass appropriate order within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶77

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶78

SD/JUDGE

¶79

SAC

Smt Premalatha B R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Premalatha B R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G Hidayathullah Vs the Director of Higher Education

Kiran Kumar C Vs State of Karnataka

The Management of T.B.S.F Pre University Vs Shivaramu R

Sri K N Lokesh Vs the State of Karnataka

S Mariswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Shobhya Naik H Vs the State of Karnataka