Allowed

Smt B C Dharma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2024WP/104634/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired lecturer whose termination was earlier quashed sought pension fixation and retirement benefits via a writ of mandamus after her representation went unanswered. Respondents agreed to consider it; the court allowed the petition and directed consideration of the representation within fixed timelines.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus to respondents 4 and 5 to consider the 22.06.2024 representation in accordance with law within six weeks; result then to respondent No.3 for consideration within three weeks.

Smt B C Dharma Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17028 WP No. 104634 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 104634 OF 2024 (S-R)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SMT. B.C. DHARMA, D/O. LATE B.S. CHINNAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. ADI SAMSTHANA PETEMUT, CHAKKODUBYLU POST, THIRTHAHALLI, SHIMOGA-577432.

¶6

…PETITIONER

¶7

(BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)

¶8

AND:

¶9

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶10

MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH

¶11

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, 2^ND FLOOR, TECHNICAL EDUCATION BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, DHARWAD-580001.

¶14

SHIVAJI EDUCATION SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BAAD, KARWAR (UTTARA KANNADA) DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581306.

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL, SHIVAJI ARTS AND COMMERCE COLLEGE, BAAD, KARWAR (UTTARA KANNADA), DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581306.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R1-R3; SRI. ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17028 WP No. 104634 of 2024

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.06.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-D, AND TO FIX PROPER PENSION AFTER APPLYING THE PROMOTION, INCREMENTS AND APPLICABLE PAY SCALES AND ALSO TO PAY ALL THE RETIRAL BENEFITS INCLUDING COMMUTATION, EL ENCASHMENT, GRATUITY AND OTHER ARREARS AFTER FIXATION OF 6^TH AND 7^TH PAY SCALE ALSO SUCH OTHER RETIRAL BENEFITS WHICH HAVE ACCRUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AFTER RETIREMENT ALONG WITH ARREARS TO THE PETITIONER, FORTHWITH, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶24

learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned counsel Sri.Anoop G Deshpande for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶25

Petitioner is working as a Kannada lecturer and was later appointed as a full time lecturer in ARS Inamdar Arts, Science and Commerce College for Women at Vijayapura, subsequently transferred to the 4^th respondent-College and also in Lalbahadur Shastri Government First Grade College, Ganga Nagar, Bengaluru

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17028 WP No. 104634 of 2024

¶27

for some time and thereafter retired after attaining superannuation on 31-01-2000.

¶28

During the course of service, the petitioner was terminated from the services of the 4^th respondentCollege, which was taken up by filing a writ petition, which came to be allowed and the order of termination came to be quashed by this Court in W.P.No.114177/2019. Along with quashing of the termination, this Court also directed to fix provisional pension of the petitioner and service gratuity and other benefits due to the petitioner.

¶29

This being the state of affairs, the service benefit, gratuity and other amount fixed, was not paid to the petitioner. Hence the petitioner made a representation to the respondent-authorities on 22.06.2024, requesting for payment of retirement benefits, fixation of pension and other benefits due to her. The representation so made by the petitioner has not been answered or considered. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus.

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17028 WP No. 104634 of 2024

¶31

Learned counsel for the contesting respondents

¶32

submits that the representation so made by the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law, if the petitioner is otherwise entitled to, in accordance with law and if reasonable time is granted.

¶33

Placing the submission of the learned counsel

¶34

for the respondents on record and the counsel for the petitioner, this petition could be disposed off. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. Petition is allowed.

¶37

ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent Nos.4 and 5 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.06.2024 in accordance with law and pass suitable orders within an outer limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶38

iii. On consideration of the representation by the respondent Nos.4 and 5, the same shall be

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC-D:17028 WP No. 104634 of 2024

¶41

submitted to the respondent No.3, which shall be

¶42

considered within a period of three weeks.

¶43

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶44

KGK

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Smt B C Dharma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt B C Dharma v. the State of Karnataka

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

J K Cement Works, Muddapur Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri Fakeerappa S/O Chayappa Boodihal Vs the State of Karnataka

Sr Venkappa S/O Veerabhadrappa Ugarkod Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Abid Hussain Kittur Vs the State of Karnataka

Mariyamma W/O Dara Rajaratnam Vs the Secretary to Government

Shri Gulzar S/O Abdul Latif Momen Vs the Authorised Officer