Partly allowed

Sri. Girish. C. N. v. the Principal Secretary

Karnataka HC21 Feb 2024WP/811/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ad-hoc teachers appointed via outsourcing agency sought service weightage and age relaxation under 2011 Regulations, bypassing 2013 amendments that excluded such benefits. The Court rejected the claim for weightage based on precedent but granted interim protection, directing the continuation of services until proper regular recruitment is conducted.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed in part; respondents directed to continue petitioners' services as teachers until regular recruitment is conducted in accordance with the 2021 Regulations.

Sri. Girish. C. N. Vs the Principal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.811 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

1 . SRI. GIRISH. C. N. S/O. NANJUNDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, VARAKODU,

¶9

MYSORE TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶10

2 . SMT. RENUKA RAVINDRA MUNJANNI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, LACHYAN, INDI TALUK, VIJAYPUR DISTRICT.

¶11

3 . SMT. SAVITHRI MALLAPPA NAIKODI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, KITTUR RANI CHANNAMMA RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, ANJUTAGI, INDI TALUK, VIJAYPUR DISTRICT.

¶12

4 . SRI. DEVINDRAPPA S/O SATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER,

¶13

¶14

MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, KEMBHAVI, SHORAPUR TALUK, YADAGIRI DISTRICT.

¶15

5 . SRI. SHARANABASAPPA S/O CHANDAPPA DODAMANI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, TAKKALAKI TALUK, BASAVAN BAGEWADI, DISTRICT VIJAYAPUR.

¶16

6 . SRI. PRAKASH BASAPPA KUDAGI AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, KITTUR RANI CHANNAMA RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, KOLHAR, TALUK BASAVAN BAGEWADI, DISTRICT VIJAYAPUR.

¶17

7 . SRI. DEVENDRAPPA S/O. BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL (S.C.) KALABELGUNDI, TALUK AND DISTRICT YADGIR.

¶18

8 . SRI. C. S. PATIL S/O. SHIVANAGOWDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, SHIDENUR, BYADAGI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT.

¶19

9 . SRI. LAKSHMANEGOWDA Y. S. S/O. SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER,

¶20

¶21

MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, S. HOSAKOTE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶22

10 . SRI. KALASWAMY S/O. MADHANAYAK, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, AUTHARA SANTHE, H.D. KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶23

11 . SRI. PRAKASH. A. P. S/O. K. PUTTASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, KITTUR RANI CHANNAMA RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, H.D. KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶24

12 . SRI. REVANSHIDHAPPA DHAREPPA AGATAGI AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, BANTHANAL, INDI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT.

¶25

13 . SMT. MANGALA PANDURANG BEWOOR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, BILAGI, BILAGI TALUK, BAGALKOT DISTRICT.

¶26

14 . SRI. DWARAKESHA S/O. MADHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL,

¶27

¶28

DODDAHUNDI, JAYPURA HOBLI, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶29

15 . SRI. BASAVA RAJA. S. R. S/O. RAMA SHETTY S. K., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT CRAFT TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, THANGALAGERE, HALLEGERE POST, BASARALU HOBALI, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶30

16 . SRI. SURESHA S/O. NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, SABBANAHALLI, BILIKERE HOBALI, HUNASURE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶31

17 . SRI. D. G. THIRUMALA S/O. D. S. GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WORKING AS DRAWING TEACHER, MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL, METRIKI, SANDURU TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT.

¶32

...PETITIONERS

¶33

(BY SRI JAGDISH SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)

¶34

AND:

¶35

1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, STATE OF KARNATAKA,

¶36

¶37

VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶38

2 . KARNATAKA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (ITS UNDER TAKING GOVT.) REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BOARD BUILDING, 6 AND 7 FLOOR, NEAR CHANDRIKA HOTEL, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052.

¶39

…RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SMT. PRATHIBHA, AGA FOR R1; SRI NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶41

THIS WP IS UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FILED PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REGULARIZES SERVICE OF JOB OF THE PETITIONERS OR TO EXTEND THE BENEFIT OF SERVICE WEIGHTAGE AND TO RELAXATION OF AGE IN THE REGULATION AND TO BRING IN CONFORMITY WITH THE RULES OF REGULARIZATION OF THEIR SERVICE OF JOB OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE RESPONDENTS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.

¶42

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

¶43

ORDER

¶44

The captioned petition is filed seeking a mandamus against the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners or to extend the benefit of service weightage and relaxation of age by amending the regulations.

¶45

¶46

The facts leading to the case are as under:

¶47

The petitioners are working as guest teachers who were

¶48

appointed purely on temporary basis by an outsourcing agency. The petitioners claim that in terms of 2011 Regulations, they are entitled for 5% weightage for each completed year of service subject to maximum of 40%. The petitioners grievance is that respondents have not extended the benefit of service weightage. The petitioners claim that pursuant to recruitment notification, they submitted an application in 2011 by paying the prescribed fee. However, the said notification was withdrawn and a fresh notification was issued on 03.11.2016. In the fresh notification issued on 03.11.2016, temporary teachers and non-teaching staff who had submitted an application in 2011 were exempted from paying the process fee. Petitioners applied for the post of Art and Drawing and are claiming service weightage in terms of 2011 Regulations.

¶49

¶50

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

¶51

reiterating the grounds would vehemently argue and contend that the respondents are bound to give service weightage in terms of 2011 Regulations. He would point out that pursuant to 2011 notification, petitioners have applied for the post of Art and Drawing Teacher and therefore, their application needs to be considered in the light of 2011 Regulations and not the subsequent Regulations brought in 2013 dispensing the benefit of service weightage.

¶52

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for

¶53

respondent No.2, however, would contend that the provision for granting weightage was done away with in respect of contract teachers and therefore, in absence of any provision for service weightage in the Regulation framed in 2013, no mandamus can be issued to provide weightage for the period of service rendered by the petitioners purely on temporary basis. He would also submit that the recruitment process is completed in 2016 and appointment orders are issued to the

¶54

¶55

selected candidates. In absence of challenge to the amended Regulations which are brought into force in 2013, no relief can be granted to the petitioners herein.

¶56

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶57

On examining the material on record, this Court would find that the temporary employees who have approached this Court are seeking a direction to extend benefit of service weightage. The petitioners, however, have not challenged the 2013 Regulations wherein, by way of amendment, the respondents have resolved to dispense service weightage to those temporary employees who have put in service in the respective Institutions. The new recruitment Rules framed in 2013 clearly dispenses with the benefit of service weightage given to the temporary teachers and also non-teaching staff. The 2011 Regulations provide for grant of weightage for service rendered by temporary teachers

¶58

¶59

who have served in High School. One more aspect which needs to be considered is that service weightage for service rendered by the teachers who were directly appointed by Society were conferred with such benefit.

¶60

In the present case on hand, petitioners are admittedly appointed purely on temporary basis by outsourcing agency. Therefore, even otherwise, the petitioners who are appointed through outsourcing agency were not entitled for service weightage in terms of 2011 Regulations.

¶61

The Coordinate Bench in the case of Morarji Desai/Ekalavya Residential Pre-University College vs. State of Karnataka¹ , while dealing with the issue has held that unless recruitment was made on a regular basis by open competition taking note of the comparative merits of the candidates, it is not desirable to issue such a direction to extend service weightage recognizing such ad-hoc and 1 (2016) 08 Kar CK 0107

¶62

¶63

temporary service rendered by the teachers who were appointed through outsourcing agency. Declining to accede to the contentions raised in the said petition, the coordinate Bench of this Court proceeded to dismiss the petition.

¶64

The petitioners’ case seeking benefit of service weightage cannot be considered on two counts. Firstly, petitioners admittedly are appointed on temporary basis by outsourcing agency. The fresh recruitment notification dated 03.11.2016 is governed by the amended regulations wherein amendment was brought on 07.08.2013. Even in absence of challenge to 2013 Regulations, no directions can be issued by this Court.

¶65

Though this Court is not inclined to grant any reliefs in the captioned petition, however, the contention of the counsel appearing for the respondents that they are entitled to appoint a new set of ad-hoc employees after completion of each and every academic year also cannot be acceded to.

¶66

¶67

Though respondents are entitled to dispense the services of the petitioners in accordance with law particularly keeping in mind that the services of petitioners were purely ad-hoc, however, the petitioners who are rendering the services purely on ad-hoc basis cannot be replaced by one more set of ad-hoc employees. The present petitioners can be relieved from the post only when the sanctioned vacant posts are filled through proper recruitment process. Therefore, petitioners are entitled for some protection though not entitled for the relief sought in the instant petition.

¶68

For the reasons stated supra, I pass the following:

¶69

ORDER

¶70

(i) The writ petition is allowed in part;

¶71

(ii) The respondents are hereby directed to continue the services of the petitioners as Teachers till regular recruitment is conducted in accordance with the Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (Cadre & Recruitment) (Amendment) Regulations, 2021;

¶72

¶73

(iii) The pending interlocutory application, if any, does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of accordingly.

¶74

Sd/JUDGE

¶75

Sri. Girish. C. N. v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Girish. C. N. v. the Principal Secretary

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. C.R. Manjunath Vs the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

Sri Jagadish M Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Smt. Shwetha Kiran Vs State of Karnataka

Kum Pallavi R S Vs the Secretary

Sri. Sudheer P Banare Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Manjunatha Prasad N.S Vs the State of Karnataka