Ram Basawan Vs the Central Silk Board — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Ram Basawan Vs the Central Silk Board — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

(i) Memorandums dated 13.02.2025 and 17.02.2025 (Annexure-G and Annexure-H) quashed; (ii) petitioner entitled to continue in employment under the respondent-Board till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years, subject to all applicable Rules and Regulations; (iii) the period from the date of relieving the petitioner till he was taken back to duties pursuant to the interim order shall be considered as 'on duty' for all purposes.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a Time Scale/temporary-status farm worker of the Central Silk Board whose retirement age was fixed at 60 years by the CGIT award dated 01.04.2013 (confirmed by the Division Bench in W.P. No.18693/2014 and followed by the Coordinate Bench in W.P. No.20742/2022), could lawfully be relieved/superannuated at the age of 58 years by the memorandums dated 13.02.2025 and 17.02.2025, and whether he is entitled to continue in service till 60 years with consequential benefits. +1 more

Court's answer

The judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the CGIT award (enhancing retirement age to 60 years) is not questioned by the respondents and has attained finality; counsel for the respondents does not dispute it.

Ratio / Principle

The issue involved in the writ petition is no more res integra; being squarely covered by the judgments of the Division Bench (W.P. No.18693/2014) and the Coordinate Bench (W.P. No.20742/2022) of this Court, and by following the said judgments, the petition is liable to be allowed in the same terms.

Key takeaways

The petitioner shall not be superannuated till he attains the age of 60 years.ratio¶61
The memorandums dated 13.02.2025 and 17.02.2025 (Annexures G and H) issued by the second and third respondents relieving the petitioner at the age of 58 years are quashed.ratio¶67
Since the respondents took back the petitioner to duties pursuant to the interim order, the period from the date of relieving him until he was taken back shall be treated as 'on duty' for all purposes.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka HC (single bench, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, 22-09-2025), Writ Petition No. 12429 of 2025 (L-TER): Ram Basawan, Skilled Farm Worker (T/S) of the Central Silk Board's Basic Tasar Silkworm Seed Organisation, relieved at 58 years by OMs dated 13.02.2025 and 17.02.2025, held entitled to serve till 60 years. The CGIT-Bengaluru award dated 01.04.2013 in C.R. No.151/2007 had enhanced the retirement age of Time Scale Farm Workers from 55 to 60 years; the Board's challenge in W.P. No.18693/2014 (L-RES) was dismissed by the Division Bench and that judgment, unchallenged, has attained finality; the Coordinate Bench in W.P. No.20742/2022 had already declared superannuation age as 60 in an identical matter. The issue being 'no more res integra' and squarely covered, the petition was allowed in the same terms: the memorandums were quashed; the petitioner may continue till 60 subject to applicable Rules and Regulations; and the interregnum between relieving and reinstatement under the interim order is reckoned as 'on duty' for all purposes. Petition pleaded Art. 226, Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution and Sec. 18(3)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 12429 OF 2025 (L-TER)

BETWEEN:

RAM BASAWAN,

S/O LATE JANAKI RAM, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, EARLIER WORKING AS SKILLED FARM WORKER (T/S),

NOW SUPERANNUATED ILLEGALLY, BASIC TASAR SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION, BASIC SEED MULTIPLICATION AND TRAINING CENTRE, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, NEAR SHIV MANDIR, KANYA PARISAR ROAD, NAMANA KALA, GANGAPUR, AMBIKAPUR POST, SURGUJA DISTRICT, CHHATTISGARH-497001.

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI NARAYANA BHAT M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE CENTRAL SILK BOARD, REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, CSB COMPLEX, BTM LAYOUT, MADIWALA, BENGALURU-560 068.

THE ASST. DIRECTOR (ADM) CENTRAL SILK BOARD, BASIC TASAR SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, 1^ST FLOOR, PENDARI, BHARNI POST, GANIYARI, BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH- 495 112.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

SCIENTIST D., BASIC TASAR SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION, BASIC SEED MULTIPLICATION AND TRAINING CENTRE, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, NEAR SHIV MANDIR, KANYA PARISAR ROAD, NAMANA KALA, GANGAPUR, AMBIKAPUR POST, SURGUJA DISTRICT, CHHATTISGARH- 497 001.

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI NARASIMHA SWAMY N.S., ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.KE RE BO / BU TA RE KEE BEE SAM/ BILAS/ RAM BASAWAN/ AMBIKAPUR/ 202425/2673 DATED 13.02.2025 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AS THE SAME ARE OPPOSED TO THE AWARD DATED 01.04.2013 IN C.R.NO.151/2007 PASSED BY THE CGIT MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ALSO SEC.18(3)(D) OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 AND ARTICLE 14 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ

of certiorari to quash the official memorandums dated 13.02.2025 and 17.02.2025 issued by the second and third respondents respectively, whereby the respondent -

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

Board relieved him from duties on attaining the age of 58 years. The petitioner has also sought a writ of mandamus for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider his representation dated 30.01.2025 and to continue his services as Skilled Farm Worker till he attains the age of 60 years and a writ of mandamus for a direction to the respondents to pay the full salary to him from 18.02.2025 to 18.02.2027 and all consequential benefits.

The petitioner in this petition was initially appointed as Casual Labourer in the respondent - Central Silk Board ( 'Board' for short) and thereafter, he was extended with pay benefits under Time Scale pay w.e.f. 01.04.1995 and thereafter, he was extended with benefits of temporary status under the scheme w.e.f. 01.07.2015 by the order dated 21.08.2015. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the Management of the 1^st respondent - Board enhanced the age of superannuation to 60 years in respect of the staff working in the Board,

but the said benefit was not extended to the petitioner.

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

Accordingly, a dispute was raised by the Trade Union. The Management did not accede to the demand of the workmen and conciliation ended in failure and the report was forwarded to the Government of India, which referred the dispute to Central Government Industrial Tribunalcum-Labour Court (CGIT), Bengaluru.

It is further contended that upon consideration of the dispute, CGIT passed the award on 1.4.2013 allowing the reference and thereby the age of retirement was enhanced from 55 years to 60 years. The respondent No.1 - Board herein filed a writ petition challenging the award passed by the CGIT in Writ Petition No.18693/2014 (L-RES). The Division Bench of this Court after considering the rival contentions of both the parties, dismissed the writ petition filed by Respondent No.1 - Board.

It is further contention of learned counsel that the judgment passed by the Division Bench confirming the award passed by the Tribunal has attained finality for the

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

reason that the same has not been questioned by Respondent No.1 - Board.

Under the circumstances, learned counsel for petitioner contends that the petitioner cannot be

superannuated until they complete the age of 60 years and he should be permitted to work in the respondent - Board till he attain the age of 60 years.

On a question posed by this Court to the learned counsel for respondents as to whether the challenge is made to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, he submits that till date, no such challenge is made. He

also does not dispute the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court stated supra having attained finality.

I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents.

It is not in dispute that in the similar situation, the Tribunal has passed the award enhancing the

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

retirement age of Time Scale Farm Workers of the respondent - establishment to 60 years. It is also not in dispute that respondent-Board challenged the award passed by the Tribunal in Writ Petition No.18693/2014 and the Division Bench of this Court has dealt with the matter in detail and confirmed the award passed by the Tribunal and dismissed the writ petition by relying upon several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court is not questioned by the respondents and it has attained finality.

Based on the above Division Bench judgment, in

an identical matter, the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.20742/2022 has declared that the age of superannuation would be 60 years.

This being the position, the issue involved in this writ petition is no more res integra . The question involved in the present petition being squarely covered by the judgments of the Division Bench and Coordinate Bench of

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

this Court stated supra , by following the said judgments

this petition is liable to be allowed in the same terms.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel

for petitioner submits that petitioner was put back into employment by virtue of the interim order passed in the present writ petition.

In view of the discussion made hereinabove, it is

made clear that petitioner shall not be superannuated till he attains the age of 60 years.

Accordingly, I pass the following:

O R D E R

i) The petition is allowed .

ii) The Memorandums dated 13.02.2025 and

17.02.2025 vide Annexure-G and Anenxure-H

are hereby quashed.

iii) The petitioner is entitled to continue in employment under respondent - Board till he

attains the age of superannuation of 60 years

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:38017 WP No. 12429 of 2025

HC-KAR

subject to all the Rules and Regulations applicable to the employment of the petitioner.

iv) In view of respondents having taken back the petitioner to the duties by virtue of the interim order passed in this writ petition, the period from the date of relieving the petitioner from duties till he is taken back to duties shall be considered as 'on duty' for all the purposes.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

CPN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41