A university employee who moved through technical resignations under Rule 252(b) KCSR challenged an endorsement binding him to the New Pension Scheme. Holding that past service must count for pension, the court quashed the endorsement and directed transfer of pensionary benefits to the new university.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 10327 OF 2021(S-RES)
BETWEEN:
DR S N VASUDEVAN S/O LATE SRI S N NABHIRAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH ZONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, V C FARM, UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE, BANGALORE, MANDYA 571405 AND RESIDING NO.A-3, UAS QUARTERS, ZAES, V.C.FARM, MANDYA 571405.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.NITIN RAMESH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
3 . UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES BANGALORE, GKVK , BENGALURU 65, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.V.SHIVA REDDY, AGA FOR R1; SRI.K.G.NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.K.SREENIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO.KUSA / KRU.VI. VI. RA/AA.VI -1/579/2018-19 DATED 4.7.2018 ISSUED BY THE R2, A TRUE COPY OF THE SAME IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H AS THE SAME IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BESIDES BEING WITHOUT ANY AUTHORITY OR JURISDICTION AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 29.02.2024, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Petitioner is assailing the endorsement bearing No. KUSA/KRU.VI.VI.RA/AA.VI-1/579/2018-19 dated
04.07.2018 issued by respondent No.2 as per Annexure-H wherein respondent No.2 under the impugned endorsement while rejecting the petitioner’s representation has held that petitioner is bound by new pension scheme introduced by the Government of Karnataka on 31.3.2006.
4
No.2-University by accepting technical resignation by Karnataka Seed Certification Agency.
No.2-University applied for the post of Associate Director of Research in respondent No.3-University and petitioner was appointed as Associate Director of Research(Professor Cadre) by way of direct recruitment at Zonal Agricultural Research Center(ZARS), V.C. Farm, Mandya.
No.3-University addressed a letter to respondent No.2 requesting to send the Service Register and Last Pay certificate of petitioner for the purpose of fixation of pay scale. It is in this context, respondent No.2 has issued the impugned endorsement in response to the representation submitted by the petitioner on
5
30.12.2017 indicating that petitioner’s appointment is
bound by New Pension Scheme.
reiterating the grounds urged in the petition and referring to Statute 66 of the University of Agricultural Sciences Statutes, 1964, (for short “UAS Statutes,1964”) would vehemently argue and contend that pensionary benefits are also admissible to the employees of University of Agriculture Science and as such the services rendered by the petitioner at the Karnataka State Seed Certification Agency and at University of Agricultural science, has to be counted for the pensionary benefits. He would further contend that the petitioner’s resignation being a technical resignation is accepted under Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (for short “KCSR”). Referring to 252(b) of KSCRs, he would contend that if a technical resignation is tendered and the same is
6
accepted in terms of Rule 252(b) of KCSRs, the resignation being a technical resignation never contemplates stoppage of service and therefore, his services has to be counted from 1986 till today.
continuity of service extended to the similarly placed employees of respondent No.2-University. Reliance is also placed on acceptance of resignation tendered by petitioner to respondent No.2-University which is accepted on 16.1.2018. He would also place reliance on the document dated 17.1.2018 issued by respondent No.3 University to substantiate that petitioner’s appointment to respondent No.3 is preceded by acceptance of technical resignation.
respondents 2 and 3 arguing in the same vein have taken this Court through the appointment order issued
7
by respondent No.3. Referring to Annexure-C, the
counsel on record would point out that petitioner’s appointment vide Annexure-C to the petition clearly indicates that petitioner’s appointment is subject to contributory pension scheme as per Government Order dated 31.3.2006. Reliance is also placed on Annexure-R2 to the statement of objections to contend that in respect of appointments made post 1.4.2006, the old pension scheme is not applicable.
and the learned counsel appearing for respondents.
endorsement dated 4.7.2018 has rejected petitioner’s claim and petitioner’s request to remit the pensionary benefits either to him or to respondent No.3University of Agricultural Sciences, on the ground that his appointment is bound by New Pension Scheme
8
introduced by Government of Karnataka on
31.3.2006.
Certification Inspector on 4.7.1986 and worked in the said Agency till 2.8. 2000. Petitioner applied for the post of Associate Professor, University of Agricultural Sciences in the Department of Seed, Science and Technology at Raichur. The application was admittedly routed out through the Karnataka Seed Certification Agency. Therefore, service rendered by the petitioner in the Agency from 4.7.1986 to 2.8.2000 as Seed Certification Inspector was counted for determining the pensionary benefits in respondent No.2-University. The agency remitted a sum of Rs.90,001.50/to the University towards its contribution at the rate of 12.5 % along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
9
of the Department of Seed Science and Technology, Raichur, petitioner applied to the post of Associate Director of Research in respondent No.3-University through proper channel. The petitioner was selected in respondent No.3-University and his technical resignation tendered to the post of Professor at respondent No.2-University under Section 252(b) of KCSRs was accepted by respondent No.2 w.e.f. 16.1.2018 as per the order at Annexure-F.
10
have justified the endorsement issued by respondent
No.2 as per Annexure-H.
as under:
“66. *(1) "Pensionary benefits are also admissible to USA employees who have rendered service in any Department/s of the Government of Karnataka/Central Government/ICAR/other Universities in India or Statutory Bodies in Karnataka formed by an Act ofLegislaturel Central Autonomous Bodies subject to the guidelines/instructions issued vide GO. No. FD 35 SRS 83 dated 27th June 1987."
(ii) Such service in individual cases, be treated by the Vice-Chancellor as services qualifying for pension subject to the condition that in each case, pension contribution at 121/2 % shall be paid by the previous employers or by the employee concerned for the services rendered based on the basic pay he drew from time to time outside the University.
(iii) The above pension contribution is payable within a period of one year, from the date on which these Statutes are given effect to in respect of the employees already working in the University and in respect of new entrants, from the date of report of the employee in the University. In cases of belated payments, a simple interest at 6 per cent per annum shall be levied on the pension contribution so outstanding till it is credited by the previous employers or by the employee concerned.
11
(iv) In respect of an employee who accepts appointment in any Department of the Government of Karnataka / Central Govt./ICAR/in any University in India or Statutory Bodies in Karnataka formed by an Act of Legislature, where Pension Scheme exists, with the prior approval ofthe University, the University will undertake to pay pension contribution to the extent of 121/2 , per cent of the basic pay drawn by such an employee from time to time provided his actual qualifying service is not less than 10 years.”
252(b) of KCSRs which reads as under:
"Rule 252(b): Resignation of an appointment to take up, with proper permission, another appointment, whether permanent or temporary, service in which counts in full or in part, is not a resignation of public service."
12
pension if the new post is in pensionable terms and therefore Government servant continue to be covered under the Old Pension Rules even if they have joined the new post after 1.4.2006. In case of a Government servant, the selection to another post on acceptance of technical resignation, his previous services are counted. The respondents’ contention that the appointment order contemplates that petitioner’s appointment is governed by New Pension scheme cannot be acceded to. The Apex Court in the case of Indra Sawhney .vs. Union of India1 has held that executive instructions can be issued only when there are no statutory provisions on the subject. Statute 66 of the UAS statutes, 1964 clearly contemplates that pensionary benefits are also admissible to UAS employees who have rendered service in any Department/s of Government of Karnataka, Central Government or other universities and such services in 1 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
13
individual cases have to be treated as qualifying service for pension. The words ‘pension’, ‘gratuity’, ‘Employees’ and ‘Family’ indicated in the UAS Statutes of respondent No.3 has the same meaning and definition as defined in the KCSRs and the Karnataka Government’s (Family Pension) Rules, 1964 as amended from time to time. Statute 73 of the UAS Statutes, 1964 would be relevant and the same reads
as under:
“73. In respect of the various kinds of pension listed in Statute 71, the corresponding provisions of KCSRs, shall apply mutatis mutandis except for sanction of weight age upto five years, (as an addition to the qualifying service actually rendered by an employee), referred to in Clause (v) of sub-rule (2) of rule 285 ofKCSRs, which (weight age) shall be given to an employee who is permitted to retire voluntarily on completion of a qualifying service of not less than 15 years. The grant of such weight age shall, however, be subject to the condition stipulated in the aforesaid clause (v), that is, that the total qualifying service after allowing the weightage shall not, in any case, exceed the qualifying service which the employee would have had, if he had retired on attaining the age of superannuation.”
14
taken note of, it is clearly evident that petitioner has tendered technical resignation and his application seeking appointment in Open Recruitment in respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 Universities was routed through proper channel and it is on selection, petitioner tendered technical resignation at the Karnataka Seed Certification Agency while being appointed as a Associate Professor at Respondent No.2 University, Raichur, and similarly, having been appointed as a Associate Director of respondent No.3 University tendered technical resignation and therefore, the application forwarded by the petitioner on two occasions while securing employment at respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 Universities was through proper channel and therefore, the resignation of the petitioner has to be treated as a
15
technical resignation and the benefit of past service is
clearly admissible in the present case on hand.
advancements.
16
on the employee's total tenure within the organization, including their time spent in the previous department or role prior to transfer. This comprehensive approach ensures that employees receive recognition and rewards commensurate with their entire service tenure, contributing to principles of fairness, equity, and employee satisfaction. Organizations may utilize established methodologies and systems to accurately calculate past services, taking into account factors such as employment start date, breaks in service, and any relevant policy guidelines or regulatory requirements.
17
leverage technical resignation practices to optimize talent resources, promote career advancement opportunities, and enhance overall organizational effectiveness wherein they are appointed by way of direct recruitment.
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed.
(ii) Impugned endorsement bearing No.
KUSA / KRU.VI. VI. RA/AA.VI -1/579/2018-19 dated 4.7.2018 issued by respondent No.2 as
per Annexure-H is hereby quashed.
(iii) Respondent No.2 is hereby directed to forward the entire pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner to respondent No.3
18
for further action, within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/JUDGE
*alb/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a government servant who joins a university post after technical resignation under Rule 252(b) KCSR is bound by the New Pension Scheme despite pre-1.4.2006 service.
Whether past service rendered in the Karnataka Seed Certification Agency and UAS Raichur must be counted for pensionary benefits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Indra Sawhney v. Union of IndiaRelied on¶15
1992 Supp (3) SCC 217 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Dr S N Vasudevan
State of Karnataka, Department of Agriculture
University of Agricultural Sciences Raichur
University of Agricultural Sciences Bangalore
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
