Allowed

Shri N L Venugopal S/O Lakshmi Narayana v. the Government Tool Room and Training Centre

Karnataka HC13 Mar 2024WP/17111/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two GTTC employees retired at 58 despite a Government Order raising retirement to 60 years. Following earlier orders in their favour confirmed up to the Apex Court, the writ petition was allowed and the relieving notices quashed with salary and consequential benefits directed.

What did the court decide?

Notices dated 2.5.2012 quashed; respondent directed to pay salary and consequential benefits within three months.

Shri N L Venugopal S/O Lakshmi Narayana Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:10555 WP No. 17111 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 17111 OF 2012 (S-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHRI N L VENUGOPAL

¶8

S/O LAKSHMI NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS MANAGER GOVERNMENT TOOL ROOM AND TRAINING CENTRE RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BANGALORE-10 AND R/AT NO 15/31, BASAPPA LAYOUT, 2^ND MAIN, GAVIPURAM EXTENSION, BANGALORE- 560019

¶9

SMT VIMALAMMA W/O VIJAY MOHAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

¶10

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

WORKING AS ASSISTANT GRADE III

¶12

GOVERNMENT TOOL ROOM AND TRAINING CENTRE, RAJAJINAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BANGALORE 10 AND RA/T NO 84, DIVINITY APARTMENTS F2, 2^ND FLOOR, 9^TH MAIN, RPC LAYOUT, HAMPINAGAR, VIJAYANAGAR, 2^ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560014.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI.M.NARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE GOVERNMENT TOOL ROOM AND TRAINING CENTRE

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:10555 WP No. 17111 of 2012

¶18

REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 010.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI. K PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE i) NOTICE BEARING NO.GTTC/ ADM / BER / NLV / 2012-13 DTD.2.5.12 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE 1ST PETITIONER MARKET AT ANNEX-D AND ETC.,

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioners who are the employees of the respondent-Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act were relieved from the service on the ground that they have attained the age of superannuation ignoring the Government Order dated 28.7.2008 vide Annexure-“A” enhancing the age of retirement of government servants of Local Bodies and other Aided Educational Institutions from 58 to 60 years. The relieving orders vide Annexures-D and F dated 2.5.2012 are challenged in this writ petition.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:10555 WP No. 17111 of 2012

¶26

The learned counsel for Petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court that employees of respondentSociety in similar circumstances had questioned the relieving orders. This Court in W.P.No.17707/2008 disposed of on 2.3.2009 has held that the Government Order vide Annexure-“A” is applicable to the employees of respondent-Society. In the result, the impugned order of relieving the petitioner therein was set aside and petitioner was permitted to continue in the service of the first respondent till he attains the age of 60 years. The said order has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1786/2009 disposed of on 23.7.2010 with a direction to first respondent, who is the appellant therein to pay all the accrued benefits till the date of reinstatement as undertaken in the appeal, which in turn is confirmed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.8070/2010 disposed of on 8.11.2023.

¶27

3. The issue involved in this case is squarely

¶28

covered by the judgment rendered by this Court and

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:10555 WP No. 17111 of 2012

¶31

confirmed by the Apex Court in the aforementioned writ petition and appeals. This Court has also taken note of the fact that the petitioners were relieved subject to the result of the writ petition.

¶32

For the reasons stated supra, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶35

(ii) The impugned notices dated 2.5.2012 vide Annexures-D and F are hereby quashed.

¶36

(iii) The respondent is hereby directed to pay the salary and all consequential benefits to the petitioners within a period of three months’ from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶37

(iv) Pending I.As, if any, stand disposed of.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Shri N L Venugopal S/O Lakshmi Narayana v. the Government Tool Room and Training Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri N L Venugopal S/O Lakshmi Narayana v. the Government Tool Room and Training Centre

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 S M Ramakrishna Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

Sri S P Rudramurthy Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

Sri B M Purushothama Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

Sri Siddalingaiah S Vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

Sri. K. R. Mahesh Vs the Commissioner

Smt M Mangala Gowri Vs State of Karnataka