HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED…
Impugned order dated 5.8.2017 quashed; Board directed to recalculate arrears on pay scale Rs.960-1760 and pay differential within three months.
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 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 3486 OF 2019 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
ALL ARE R/AT NO.67 AADINARAYANA GUDI BEEDI COTTON PET
2
BANGALORE-560 053.
[CAUSE TITLE AMENDED V/O DATED 08.08.2023]
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. M. BABU RAO, ADVOCATE FOR P1(A TO C))
AND:
THE COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD SHESHADRIPURAM RISHILDAR STREET BANGALORE-560 002.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K. RAMACHANDRAN, ADVOCATE AND SRI. ABHINAY .Y.T, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THE ORDER DTD5.8.2017 PASSED BY R-1 [ANENXURE-U] AS NULL AND VOID IN SO FOR DENIAL OF ARREARS OF SALARY FROM 1.8.89 TO 24.10.2000 IN THE PAY OF RS.960/- REVISED LEAVE ENCASHMENT WITH ALL CONSEQUNETIAL BENEFITS WITH FUTHER DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO GRANT BALANCE OF ARREARS OF SALARY OF RS.1,29,828/-.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 10.09.2024, THIS DAY ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED THEREIN, AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
3
C.A.V. ORDER
Captioned petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the order dt.5.8.2017 as per Annexure-U and to grant of arrears in the pay scale of RS.960-1760/- as against the granted pay scale of Rs.810/- per month from 1.8.1989 along with all consequential benefits.
The petitioner was appointed as an literate assistant on daily wage basis on 2.4.1985. The petitioner had completed SSLC even prior to his appointment. The services of petitioner and another worker were terminated without giving any reasons vide order dated 2.4.1988. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner and the other terminated employee challenged the order in W.P No.9548-49/1988. This Court allowed the writ petitions and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service w.e.f. 2.4.1988 and
4
grant all consequential benefits and all accrued benefits that would have been available to the petitioner if he had not been terminated.
5
was disposed off with a direction to the respondents to consider the application within a period of six weeks.
scale of Rs.960-1760/- w.e.f 1.8.1989 and petitioner was also placed in second division assistant cadre and the arrears were to be payable from 24.10.2000 vide order dated 24.10.2000.
representations to the respondents to grant arrears w.e.f 1.8.1989 on the revised pay scale.
The respondents rejected these representations vide endorsement dated 26.9.2000. Petitioner challenged the endorsement of rejection in W.P No.6729/2010. The writ petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner’s representations afresh keeping in mind the orders passed in the earlier round of writ petitions. This
6
exercise was to be completed within a period of three months.
7
If the pay had been calculated according to the revised pay scale granted to the petitioner then for 1.8.1989 to 24.10.2000 the arrears in Salary would amount to Rs.1,63,998/- and arrears in leave would be Rs.19,508/- which would add up to a total of Rs.1,83,506/-. The respondents by Cheque dated 2.3.2018 have only paid Rs.53,778/and the petitioner contends that he is still entitled to the remaining arrears of Rs.1,29,828/- (Calculation at Annexure - W). The petitioner contends that this denial of balance arrears is arbitrary and unjustified.
the respondents reiterating the grounds urged in the statement of objections contends that following the orders of this Hon’ble Court, the arrears due to the petitioner amounting to Rs.53,679/- has already been paid to the petitioner via cheque dated 2.3.2018. The counsel further contends that the respondents have
8
calculated the arrears due in accordance to the order of this Hon’ble Court which is evidenced at Annexure-U and the petitioner’s claim of Rs.1,29,828/- is pending arrears is arbitrary and baseless.
9
this Court in W.P.No.9548-49/1988 and W.P.No.235452/1994.
petitioner's right to seek arrears in the pay scale of Rs.960-1760/-, this Court deems it fit to extract the findings recorded by the Co-Ordinate Bench in the earlier round of litigation. Paras 8 to 10 are relevant and the same are extracted as under:
"8. Petitioners learned counsel submits that if the petitioners are entitled to succeed in this petition, they will have to be relegated to the position as on 2.4.88. This has been seriously disputed by the respondents counsel who submits that even if the petitioners were to succeed, that at the highest, they would be entitled to be put back in the position of their colleagues with effect from the date of this order. I am unable to accept the latter submission in view of the earlier findings that have been recorded in this judgment. The inevitable consequence of the quashing of the order of termination would be that the petitioner would have to be reinstated to their original position with effect from 2.4.88 with all consequential benefits.
10
9. The petitions accordingly succeed. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.
10. It is clarified that the direction in respect of consequential benefits shall mean that the petitioners stand relegated to the position as though they had not been discontinued as on 2.4.88. By virtue of the subsequent orders and directions of the Govt. to the respondent-Board whatever regulisation and changes in service conditions of other similarly situated employees have received would accrue to the present petitioners. The respondent-Board shall reinstate the petitioners by virtue of the directions of this court on or before 1.10.94 and shall compute and pay to them the arrears due before 31.12.94. The learned counsel on both sides shall convey the operative part of this order to the Board."
by the petitioner, it is evident that petitioner is asserting that similarly placed employees who were working on daily wages are extended the pay scale of Rs.960-1760/-. Petitioner, however, to substantiate
11
this factual matrix has not placed on record the documents.
12
employees in similar circumstances to establish that the petitioner’s claim was not aligned with the treatment of others in comparable situations.
13
respondents’ credibility and reinforces the petitioner’s argument that the revised pay scale and corresponding arrears were not properly addressed. This adverse inference reflects the respondents’ inadequacy in justifying their actions and supports the need for corrective measures as directed by the court.
14
15
proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is partially allowed, and the impugned order dated 5.8.2017 passed by respondent/Board as per Annexure-U is hereby quashed.
(ii) The respondent/Board is directed to recalculate the arrears based on the correct pay scale of Rs.960-1760/- and to pay the differential amount to the petitioner.
(iii) This recalculation and payment must be completed within three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, ensuring that the petitioner receives all due arrears as per the revised pay scale and previous Court directives.
SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
*alb/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Board's endorsement denying arrears of salary in the revised pay scale of Rs.960-1760 from 1.8.1989 to 24.10.2000 was arbitrary and unsustainable.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Muniyappa S.V. (deceased, by LRs - Indira, Vijay Kumar S.M., Shivashenkar S.M.)
The Commissioner, Karnataka Slum Development Board
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
