Allowed

Smt. R.Shashirekha v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jul 2024WP/10575/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition by employees deputed from a public sector unit, holding they must be absorbed from their deputation date. The court directed admission to financial benefits from that date, with interest accruing from the notification date of the relevant rules.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' absorption declared effective from the date of deputation; they must be admitted to all consequential financial benefits from that date, with interest from the date of Notification of the

Smt. R.Shashirekha Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10575 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SMT. R.SHASHIREKHA W/O SRI D.S.HEMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSAKOTE, BANGALORE-562114 RESIDING AT NO.30, 1^ST CROSS, ADARSHA NAGAR, NAGARABHAVI, BANGALORE-560072.

¶6

Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶7

SRI M.C.KESHAVA S/O LATE D.M.RAMA SWAMY GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MANDYA-571401 RESIDING AT NO.423, 10^TH CROSS, S.S.COLONY, MANDYA-571402.

¶8

SRI RAMESH.H S/O HANUMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, WORKING AS ELECTRICIAN, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,

¶9

¶10

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶11

K.R.NAGAR, MYSORE-571602 RESIDING AT BHAIRAVESHWARANA NAGAR, 4^TH CROSS, CHEERANAHALLI ROAD, MANDYA-571403.

¶12

SRI G.B.NINGAIAH S/O LATE BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, WORKING AS D-GROUP (WATER MAN) TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MADDUR TOWN, MANDYA-571428 RESIDING AT 5TH CROSS, LEELAVATHI EXTENSION, MADDUR TOWN, MANDYA-571428.

¶13

SRI M.VENKATESH S/O LATE V.MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, WORKING AS D-GROUP (ATTENDER), TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MADDURU, MANDYA-571428 RESIDING AT NO.382, 7^TH CROSS, SWARNASANDRA, MANDYA-571402.

¶14

SRI CHAMARAJU S/O SRI RAMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, WORKING AS D-GROUP, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA-571434 RESIDING AT UMMARAHALLI GATE, (SRINIVASAPURA), MANDYA-571401

¶15

(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA G GAYATRI.,ADVOCATE)

¶16

…PETITIONERS

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶19

AND:

¶20

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF DISINVESTMENT AND PUBLIC SECTOR ENTERPRISES, M.S.BUILDINGS, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001.

¶22

THE DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, 9^TH FLOOR, VISWESWARAIAH TOWER, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI.GOPALA KRISHNA SOODI., AGA )

¶25

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS RELATING TO ISSUANCE OF NOTIFICATION DATED 09/03/2022 IN REF NO. UDD 420 GEL 2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-1; QUASH THE SUB-CLAUSE (III) OF RULE 3 AND SUBCLAUSE (i), (ii) AND (iii) OF RULE 4 IN SO FAR AS GRANTING BENEFIT OF ABSORPTION FROM THE DATE

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶28

OF ISSUANCE OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 09/03/2022 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED BY DECLARING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY ETC.

¶29

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

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The petitioners were initially employed by a Public Sector Undertaking, M/s. Mysore Acetate and Chemicals Limited, and with the decision to close this Enterprise, they were sent on deputation to different Municipalities. The Government of Karnataka, after earlier round of litigation [ including contempt proceedings ], has notified Karnataka Municipalities [Absorption of Certain Employees from the Mysore Acetate and Chemicals Limited in Urban Local Bodies] [Special] Rules, 2021 [for short, '2021 Rules' ]. The petitioners have called in question the different provisions of the 2021 Rules.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶34

Sri Raghavendra G Gayatri, the learned

¶35

counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners' essential grievance is with the stipulation in Sub-Rule [4] of Rule 3 of the 2021 Rules that the absorption shall be effective from the date of the concerned reporting to duty consequential to appointment orders to be issued under 2021 Rules. The provisions of Rule 3[4] of the 2021 Rules read as under:

¶36

"3. Absorption of certain employees of Mysore Acetate and Chemicals Limited in Urban Local Bodies:-

¶37

[1] xxxx xxxx xxxx [2] xxxx xxxx xxxx [3] xxxx xxxx xxxx

¶38

[4] The absorption shall be effective from the date of person concerned reports to duty consequential to the appointment order."

¶39

Sri Raghavendra G Gayatri, in support of

¶40

the petitioners' grievance and for declaration that the petitioners' absorption should be from the date of

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶43

their deputation with the concerned Local Bodies, relies upon the following.

¶44

[a] The petitioners, as with the case of those who were employed with M/s. Mysore Lamp Works Limited and sent on deputation to different Local Bodies and other Departments, have approached this Court with their corresponding writ petitions in W.P. No.28200/2003 and connected matters for directions for their absorption.

¶45

[b] These writ petitions are allowed by Order dated 22.03.2012 quashing the decision of the State Government to deny absorption and directing the State Government to consider the petitioners' case for absorption in the light of the observations made in such order viz., that it would be unjust and unfair to deny the benefit of absorption to the petitioners because the decision to depute the petitioners to the Local Bodies as against deputation with other

¶46

¶47

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶48

Establishment/Boards and Corporations was by the State Government and not at the instance of the petitioners and to deny the absorption after they have put in sufficient service.

¶49

[c] This Court's order has been called in question in the corresponding intra-Court appeals but unsuccessfully inasmuch as the intra-Court appeals in Writ Appeal No.5571/2013 and connected matters are dismissed. Even the Division Bench has observed that because similarly circumstanced persons are absorbed, the State Government cannot take a view to the contrary.

¶50

[d] The employees, who were sent on deputation from M/s. Mysore Lamp Works Limited, were also given the benefit of absorption after initiation of contempt proceedings and on condition such as that there should be regular and continuous service. These persons have

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶53

called in question such conditions in the writ petition in W.P. No.10021/2020.

¶54

[e] A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of this petition in W.P. No.10021/2020 on 12.10.2023 specifically observing that the absorption of the petitioners therein must be effective from the date they started working on deputation with the concerned and that they would be entitled to all financial benefits effective from the date of deputation with interest from the date of absorption.

¶55

[f] The State Government has accepted the writ Court's Order and issued Order dated 14.05.2024 for absorption, as directed by the Co-ordinate Bench and with financial benefits from the date of deputation but interest from the date of orders for absorption.

¶56

The circumstances and the grounds urged are borne out by the records. Irrefutably, the

¶57

¶58

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶59

similarly circumstanced persons have been absorbed inter alia on the ground that it would not be fair and just to deny absorption because the decision to send the similarly circumstanced persons on deputation to the Local Bodies was not at the instance of these persons but by the State itself and that if some similarly circumstanced persons have already been absorbed, the State Government cannot take a different stand.

¶60

This Court must opine that parity for absorption and absorption from the respective dates of deputation is established in the light of the circumstances in which the similarly circumstanced persons who are employed with M/s. Mysore Lamps Works Limited are absorbed with this Court's intervention by the Order dated 12.10.2023 in the writ petition in W.P. No.10021/2020 and the consequential Order dated 14.05.2024. Therefore,

¶61

10 -

¶62

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶63

the petition must be preferred, and it is preferred by the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

[a] The petition is allowed declaring that the petitioners' absorption must be from the date they were sent on deputation to the concerned Local Body and that they must be admitted to all consequential financial benefits effective from such date but the interest payable at 6% per annum shall only be from the date of Notification of the Rules 2021.

¶66

[b] The petitioners are reserved with liberty to file a representation along with a certified copy of this order with the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Karnataka, within four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶67

11 -

¶68

NC: 2024:KHC:27781 WP No. 10575 of 2023

¶69

[c] The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Karnataka, if a representation with a certified copy of this order is filed within four weeks from the date of receipt thereof, shall consider and pass just orders in the light of this Court's observations and conclusions as aforesaid within a period of three [3] months from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶70

SD/JUDGE

¶71

AN/-

Smt. R.Shashirekha v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. R.Shashirekha 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Santhosh Kumar B S Vs State of Karnataka

Dr Chandrakumar S G S/O Late S H Giriyaiah Vs State of Karnataka

K.M. Vedamurthy Vs Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd., (Bescom)

K R Ravinandan Vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.

Govinda Matti Vs Mangalore University

Sri. M.L. Srinivasa Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka