Dismissed¶67

K Ramaiah, v. the Managing Director

Service law – pension – one notional increment on superannuation

Karnataka HC16 Oct 2025WA/636/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; Writ Appeal No. 636 of 2025 (S-RES); bench: D K Singh (author) and Rajesh Rai K; decided 16 October 2025. Keywords: KPTCL; Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited; State Government undertaking; retired employees; one increment; pension fixation; terminal benefits; differential pay; enhanced pension after 31.04.2023; increment from 01.05.2023; belated writ petition; recurring cause of action; Section 4 Karnataka High Court Act; W.P.No.10703/2024; W.P.No.19420/2024; appeal dismissed; impugned judgment dated 21.02.2025 upheld.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ appeal was dismissed and the learned Single Judge's order dated 21.02.2025 was left undisturbed. ¶67

K Ramaiah, Vs the Managing Director — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 636 OF 2025 (S-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

K RAMAIAH, S/O. KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, No.5, 1^ST CROSS, 10^TH MAIN, YELACHANALLI WARD, K S LAYOUT, YELACHANALLI,

¶11

BANGALORE - 560 076.

¶12

Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

G. S. ANANDA KRISHNA S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, FLAT NO 408, EXPERIA APARTMENT KOTHNUR MAIN ROAD, J.P NAGAR, 7TH PHASE BANGALORE-560 078.

¶14

B. K. BHAIRAKKANAVAR S/O. KAMAPPA S. BHAIRAKKANAVAR AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, PLOT NO. 82, 'A' BLOCK MANJUNATH NAGAR, HAVERI POST, HAVERI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 581 110.

¶15

S.C. CHIKKAMATH S/O. CHANNAVEERA SWAMY CHIKKMATH

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, NO. 348, SWATHI, BASAVESHVARA NAGAR B BLOCK, 11TH CROSS, HAVERI -581 110

¶19

K MANJAPPA S/O LATE KARIBASAPPA GUDVI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, MANJUGIRI NILAYA, S.R.S LAYOUT, KELADI ROAD, SAGARA-57740, SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT.

¶20

B.M. THIPPESWAMY S/O. LATE B.M. UDDANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, D.NO. 138/288, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR 2^ND MAIN, RENUKACHAR ROAD,

¶21

BALLARY 583 103.

¶22

K. LAKSHMANA S/O. LATE BASANNA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, PLOT NO 13 AND 16M, 19TH WARD, SRI NAGALINGESHWARA NILAYA, GOLLANARASAPPA COLONY, S.N.PETE ROYAL COLONY ROAD, BALLARY- 583 101.

¶23

G. VIJAYAKUMAR S/O. LATE G CHANNABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, GESCOM, O AND M DIVISION, SHUBAMANGALA 2^ND MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, BALLARY 583 103.

¶24

Y. ERANNA S/O. ERAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, O AND M RSD BALLARY ROAD,

¶25

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

GESCOM, 23RD WARD NEAR FIRE OFFICE, BALLARY ROAD, KARUGOODU

¶29

D. ERANNA, S/O. LATE CT ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, ALLAM LAYOUT, 5^TH CROSS, MOKA ROAD, BALLARY.

¶30

ABBDUL SATTAR, S/O. LATA RASSOL SAB AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, BATTADAPALLI, MD DIVISION, BALLARY-583 103.

¶31

CHANNARAYAPPA S/o LATE CHIKKADASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/a No. E-266, A-BLOCK, ITI COLONY, DOORVANINAGAR, NEAR VIDYAMANDIR CENTRAL SCHOOL, NORTH FIRST LANE, BANGALORE-560016.

¶32

…APPELLANTS

¶33

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA K., ADVOCATE)

¶34

AND:

¶35

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KPTCL, CORPORATE OFFICE, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009.

¶36

THE DIRECTOR (A AND HR) KPTCL, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009

¶37

…RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI. CHANDRACHUD., ADVOCATE)

¶39

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

PASSED IN WP No-19420/2024 DATED 21.02.2025 IN SO FAR AS GRANTING OF INCREMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF FIXATION OF PENSION ONLY FROM 01.05.2023 AND DENYING THE BENEFIT OF INCREMENT FROM THE DATE OF THEIR RETIREMENT FOR ALL TERMINAL BENEFITS AS SOUGHT FOR IN THE WP.

¶43

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶45

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶46

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶47

The present writ appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 21.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.10703/2024 (S-RES) and connected matters.

¶48

For the sake of convenience the parties are referred

¶49

to as per their ranking before the learned Single Judge.

¶50

The petitioners are retired employees of Karnataka

¶51

Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for short 'the

¶52

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

KPTCL' ), a State Government undertaking. All the petitioners got retired during different years i.e., in 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2007 etc. The date of retirement and grant of one increment sought for in the writ petition has

¶55

been taken note of in the impugned judgment at paragraph 3, which is extracted hereunder :-

¶56

"3. All the petitioners are retired employees of respondent-KPTCL and their date of retirement and due date of increment of each of the writ petitioner is as follows:

¶57

Petitioner/s in	Date of Retirement	Due date of increment
W.P.No.10703/2024 Virupakshappa Malakappa Patri	01.05.2006	01.05.2007
W.P.No.28629/2023 K.N.Guruprasad	31.12.2020	01.01.2021
W.P.No.13334/2024 1. Sri.C.Ramaiah 2. Smt. Parvathi Bai	(1) 30.06.2003 (2) 31.12.2004	(1) 01.07.2003 (2) 01.01.2005
W.P.No.16939/2024
Sri.G.Narayanappa	31.07.2018	01.08.2018

¶58

¶59

NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

W.P.No.19420/2024 Shriyuths
1. K.Ramaiah	(1) 31.03.2006	(1) 01.04.2006
2. G.S.Ananda Krishna	(2) 31.03.2014	(2) 01.04.2014
3. B.K.Bhairakkanavar	(3) 30.04.2018	(3) 01.05.2018
4. S.C.Chikkmath	(4) 31.12.2006	(4) 01.01.2007
5. K.Manjappa	(5) 31.12.2021	(5) 01.01.2022
6. M.Thippeswamy	(6) 30.06.2008	(6) 01.07.2008
7. K.Lakshmana	(7) 30.06.2016	(7) 01.07.2016
8. G.Vijayakumar	(8) 30.06.2011	(8) 01.07.2011
9. Y.Eranna	(9) 30.06.2014	(9) 01.07.2014
10. D.Eranna	(10) 30.06.2014	(10) 01.07.2014
11. Abbdul Sattar	(11) 31.07.2010	(11) 01.08.2010
12. Channarayappa	(12) 31.03.1998	(12) 01.04.1998
13. B.Nandeeshappa	(13) 31.03.2005	(13) 01.04.2005
W.P.No.26593/2023
Shriyuths
1. B.Govindaraju	(1) 30.06.2008	(1) 01.07.2008
2. B.C.Hanumantharaya	(2) 31.03.2012	(2) 01.04.2012
3. Rangaswamy	(3) 31.03.2016	(3) 01.04.2016
4. Venkateshaiah.G	(4) 31.03.2012	(4) 01.04.2012
5. Gangaiah	(5) 31.07.2013	(5) 01.04.2013
6. Hanumanthaiah	(6) 31.03.2014	(6) 01.04.2014
7. Basavaraju.M.S	(7) 31.03.2004	(7) 01.04.2004
8. Nagarajaiah.N	(8) 31.03.2015	(8) 01.04.2015
9. Hanumaiah.K	(9) 31.03.2014	(9) 01.04.2014
10. Gangappa N.K.	(10) 30.04.2014	(10) 01.05.2014
11. Sathyanarayana Murthy	(11) 31.03.2007	(11) 01.04.2007
12. Shivappa.S.G	(12) 31.03.2004	(12) 01.04.2004
W.P.No.26793/2023
1. M.N.Basavaraj	(1) 31.03.2000	(1) 01.04.2000
2. Shivanandaiah	(2) 31.05.2003	(2) 01.06.2003
3. M.Mahadevappa	(3) 31.03.2013	(3) 01.04.2013
W.P.No.26505/2023
Shriyuths:
1. Varalakshmi Bai	(1) 31.12.2022	(1) 01.01.2023
2. H.Madhusudana	(2) 31.03.2013	(2) 01.04.2013
3. Siddashetty	(3) 31.03.2012	(3) 01.04.2012
W.P.No.20898/2023
Sri.Venkataramu.G	31.03.2006	01.04.2006

¶62

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:41414-DB WA No. 636 of 2025

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

Such belated writ petitions are not liable to be entertained by this Court. We hold that grant of increment cannot be said to be a recurring cause of action, that too 20 years after the date of retirement of an employee. The

¶66

learned Single Judge having considered the facts and circumstances of the petitions has rightly held that petitioners are not entitled for differential pay as a result of denial of one increment. However, considering the work done by the petitioners, held that they would be entitled to enhanced pension after 31.04.2023.

¶67

We do not find any error in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, which calls for interference. Accordingly the instant writ appeals stands dismissed .

¶68

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶69

Sd/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶70

NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

K Ramaiah, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Ramaiah, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Karnataka Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Vs Smt T Nalini

Sri. Kiran R.G. Vs Office of Zilla Panchayath

Sri M Ramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Kannan. N Vs the Managing Director

Sri T H Manjunath Vs Sri G N Malleshappa

The Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs Sri Harish B T