Allowed

Shri J Gopalappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Aug 2024WP/5565/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement a 2007 Board resolution changing his cadre and amending corresponding rules. The Court, finding that the authority had already granted the cadre benefit, directed them to effect the necessary rule amendments within three months to avoid legal validity issues regarding the post.

What did the court decide?

R(i) Directing the respondents to give effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No. 2 dated 12.09.2007 and take all necessary steps to sanctify the change of the cadre of t

Shri J Gopalappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 5565 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHRI J. GOPALAPPA S/O LATE JUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (ADDL. CHARGE) KARNATAKA RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED, BEHIND JMIT COLLEGE, CHITRADURGA CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

THE KARNATAKA RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, GRAMEENAABHIVRUDHI BHAVANA 4^TH FLOOR, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560009

¶14

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LIMITED GRAMEENAABHIVRUDHI BHAVANA

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶16

4^TH FLOOR, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶17

THE DIRECTOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. PRINCE ISAC, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 4;

¶20

SRI. NATARAJU T., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3; SMT. SUMANGALA A. SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT i.e., PROPOSED RESPONDENT NO.5 IN I.A. No.1/2024)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 3^RD RESPONDENT TO IMPLEMENT THE RESOLUTION OF THE 2^ND RESPONDENT BOARD DATED 12.9.2007 (VIDE ANNEXURE-F) AND TO AMEND THE C AND R RULES SUITABLY CONVERTING ONE POST OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GRADE-II (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER) TO THAT OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GRADE-I (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GRADE-I) WITHIN A TIME LIMIT TO BE STIPULATED BY THIS HONBLE COURT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

¶25

(i) To issue of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 3^rd Respondent to implement the resolution of the

¶26

2^nd respondent Board dated 12.09.2007 (vide Annexure-F) and to amend the C & R Rules

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶28

suitably converting one post of Assistant Director Grade-II (Assistant Executive Engineer) to that of Assistant Director Grade-I (Assistant Executive Engineer Grade.I) within a time limit to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;

¶29

(ii) To direct the Respondents to grant all consequential benefits that the Petitioner is entitled to pursuant to the resolution dated 12.9.2007 and the amendment of the C & R Rules carried on by the 3^rd Respondent in terms of the Resolution dated 12.9.2007."

¶30

The petitioner contends that he was initially appointed as an Assistant Task Force Commandant (now Junior Engineer) on 18.01.1990. He was thereafter promoted as Task Force Commandant-II (Assistant Engineer Grade-II) on 26.09.1997 and then promoted as Assistant Director Grade – II (Assistant Executive Engineer Grade II) on 04.12.2001. He contends that on a representation dated 02.05.1997 requesting permission to pursue Degree in Civil Engineering in evening college, the respondent No.3 granted him permission. Later he acquired a Degree in Civil Engineering on 22.12.2001 and also secured Master in Business Administration Degree on

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶33

08.01.2007. He contends that the Regulations of the respondent No.2 framed in the year 1996 provided for appointment by transfer from the cadre of Assistant Task Force Commandant (ATFC) to that of Task Force Commandant (TFC) Grade, consequent on acquiring B.E. Degree and there was no further promotional avenue from the cadre of Assistant Director Grade-II. Since the petitioner was already promoted to the post of Assistant Director Grade-II, he submitted a representation on 14.06.2004 to the Managing Director, the then Karnataka Land Army Corporation, requesting him to convert the post of Assistant Director Grade-II, in which he was working, to that of Assistant Director Grade-I and consider his claim for promotion by changing the cadre of Assistant Director Grade-II to Assistant Director Grade-I. This was followed by another representation dated 09.03.2007 and a further representation dated 12.03.2007. The respondent No.2 at its 153^rd meeting of Board of Directors held on 12.09.2007 took a decision to change the cadre of the petitioner by suitably amending the Cadre and Recruitment Rules ('C and R Rules' for short) and directed the respondent No.3 to amend the C and R Rules accordingly. Pending such amendment, the cadre of the

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶35

petitioner was changed from Assistant Director Grade-II to that of Assistant Director Grade-I with effect from 01.01.2008. The change of cadre of the petitioner was brought to the notice of respondent No.1 by way of a communication dated 04.06.2009. Despite the directions issued by the respondent No.2 to the respondent No.3 to amend the C and R Rules, he did not take any steps in that regard. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was promoted as a Deputy Director (now Executive Engineer) by an order dated 30.07.2020 and was placed in additional charge of the post of Superintending Engineer by an order dated 01.08.2022. It is contended that being aggrieved by the order dated 26.09.2007 permitting the change of cadre of the petitioner, a person named Sri Siddhartha S. filed W.P. No.18511/2012 contending that it was contrary to the procedure prescribed under the Regulations of the respondent No.2. In the said writ petition, the respondent authorities filed an affidavit and submitted that they would be setting the anomaly right by making necessary amendments to the C and R Rules. This Court in terms of the order dated 31.05.2023, disposed off the writ petition by permitting the petitioner therein to make one more representation to the respondent

¶36

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶37

No.3 herein / respondent No.1 therein while directing the respondent No.3 herein to consider such representation within the time stipulated therein. The respondent No.3 instead of complying the direction issued by this Court in W.P. No.18511/2012 sought for a clarification from the respondent No.1 about the process for amending the C and R Rules. The respondent No.1 in terms of its letter dated 05.04.2023, clarified that the respondent No.2 was a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and therefore, any decision to amend the C and R Rules had to taken by it. The petitioner contends that a representation was thereafter submitted on 15.06.2023 to the respondent No.3 to carry out necessary amendment to the C and R Rules to give effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007 so as to sanctify the change of the cadre of the petitioner and to enable him to claim further promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. However, the respondent No.3 placed the issue for consideration before the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 at its 214^th meeting. The Board of Directors again referred the matter to the respondent No.3 seeking his clear opinion in the matter. The petitioner

¶38

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶39

contends that the respondent No.3 is now not taking any steps to give effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007. The petitioner, is therefore, before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and contended that the resolution of the Board of Directors of respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007 is neither withdrawn nor modified nor annulled till date but on the contrary based on the said resolution, the cadre of the petitioner is changed from Assistant Director Grade-II to Assistant Director Grade-I and without there being corresponding amendment to the C and R Rules, the post held by the petitioner has no sanctity in the eye of law. He, therefore, prays that suitable directions be issued to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to give effect to the said resolution dated 12.09.2007.

¶41

Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has filed a statement of objections contending inter alia that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have adopted the Karnataka Civil Services Rules in C and R Rules. Therefore, an

¶42

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶43

opinion was sought from the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms ('DPAR' for short) as to whether C and R Rules of the respondent No.2 can be amended retrospectively or not. In that regard, DPAR had given its opinion regarding the procedure to be followed while changing the post from one cadre to the other and to make a Rule having retrospective effect. The DPAR had specifically stated that the change in the cadre has to be made only after consultation and approval by the Finance Department and after obtaining concurrence from the Finance Department, the reasons for changing a Rule retrospectively have to be placed before both the Houses of the State Legislature. Therefore, the matter was placed before the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 at its 214^th meeting and the Board had referred the issue for opinion of the respondent No.3. Therefore, it is contended that the matter is pending consideration before the respondent No.3 and that the petitioner has hurriedly approached this Court. It is also contended that necessary steps have been taken to amend the C and R Rules in terms of the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007. It is also contended that the Board has the power to review its earlier

¶44

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶45

resolution subject to the Rules and Regulations and that it has not taken any decision in that regard.

¶46

Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 reiterated the above contentions and further contended that the petitioner has no vested right to compel that the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007 has to be given effect to.

¶47

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶48

It is not in dispute that the respondent No.2 at its 153^rd meeting of the Board of Directors held on 12.09.2007 had permitted the change of cadre of the petitioner from Assistant Director Grade-II to that of Assistant Director Grade-I with effect from 01.01.2008 and had also directed the respondent No.3 to bring about necessary amendments to the C and R Rules. This was followed by an official memorandum dated 26.09.2007 issued by the respondent No.3 changing the cadre of the petitioner from Assistant Director Grade-II to Assistant Director Grade-I with effect from 01.01.2008. The petitioner

¶49

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶50

was thereafter granted the benefit of the change of cadre and he is officiating in the changed cadre from then on. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 having once given the benefit of the change of cadre of the petitioner, had to take necessary steps for amendment of the C and R Rules so as to give ex post facto sanction to change the cadre of the post of petitioner. If the said resolution has remained from the year 2007 till date and if the State Government has opined that it is unnecessary to obtain the permission of the State Government or the Finance Department for amendment of the C and R Rules, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 cannot resile from this and claim that there is no provision in law to amend C and R Rules with retrospective effect. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 must have been mindful of the fact that the petitioner and similarly situated persons did not have any promotional avenue and therefore, it was necessary for change of cadre of the Assistant Director Grade-II to Assistant Director Grade-I. Since the respondent No.2 has already taken a policy decision to change the cadre of the petitioner from Assistant Director Grade-II to Assistant Director Grade-I with effect from 01.01.2008 and also to amend the C and R Rules so as to sanctify the change of cadre

¶51

11 -

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶53

of the petitioner, same cannot remain on paper for long as the petitioner may be deprived of further promotional avenues.

¶54

In that view of the matter, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are bound to be directed to give effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007 and proceed to take necessary steps to give effect to the said resolution concerning amendment of the Cadre and Recruitment Rules more particularly in view of the opinion of the respondent No.1 that there was no need to obtain concurrence from the Finance Department or the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms. Consequently, the following:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

i. The writ petition is allowed.

¶57

ii. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 are

¶58

directed to give effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007 in accordance with law and take all necessary steps to sanctify the change of cadre of the petitioner from Assistant Director Grade-II to

¶59

12 - NC: 2024:KHC:31580 WP No. 5565 of 2024

¶60

Assistant Director Grade-I. This shall be done

¶61

within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶62

In view of disposal of this petition, I.A. No.1/2024 filed by the impleading applicant is disposed off reserving liberty to him to take such other steps as are available under law in the event of respondent Nos.2 and 3 giving effect to the resolution of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 dated 12.09.2007.

¶63

In view of disposal of this petition, I.A.No.2/2024 for vacating stay does not arise for consideration and the same stands disposed off.

¶64

Sd/-

¶65

(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶66

SMA

¶67

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Shri J Gopalappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri J Gopalappa 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

Sri. Ullas H. Vs the Chief General Manager

Sathish Kumar S T Vs Union of India

Sri. H.M. Srikantaiah Vs the Karnataka Power Transmission

P M Bharath Vs the State of Karnataka

Basavarajappa M Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Ramachandra R. Vs the Deputy General Manager