Than Singh Vs the Central Silk Board

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

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

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 18131 OF 2025 (L-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

THAN SINGH, S/O DURDESHI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, EARLIER WORKING AS SKILLED FARM WORKER (T/S), NOW SUPERANNUATED ILLEGALLY, BASIC SEED MULTIPLICATION AND TRAINING CENTRE, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, BASTAR POST, BASTAR DISTRICT, CHATTISGARH - 494 223. AND R/AT NO.196, NAWAGUDAPARA, DUBEY POST, BASTAR DISTRICT, CHATTISGARH - 494 223.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI NARAYANA BHAT M., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, MOT, GOVT. OF INDIA, 1^ST FLOOR, PENDARI, BHARNI POST, GANIYARI, BILASPUR, CHATTISGARH - 495 112.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

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

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.CSB/BTSSO/ESTT.PF (AKB-SFWTSS)/309 DATED 28.05.2025 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F 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.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

This petition is filed by the petitioner to quash the memorandum dated 28.05.2025 issued by the second respondent, whereby the respondent - 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 the respondents to pay the full salary to him from 09.06.2025 to 09.06.2027 and all consequential benefits.

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

The petitioner in this petition was initially

¶28

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. 01.09.1992 and thereafter, he was extended with benefits of temporary status under the scheme w.e.f. 01.07.2015. 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. 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 Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (CGIT),

¶29

Bengaluru.

¶30

It is further contended that upon consideration of

¶31

the dispute, CGIT passed the award on 01.04.2013

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

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.

¶35

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

¶36

Under the circumstances, learned counsel for petitioner contends that the petitioner cannot be superannuated until they complete the age of 60 years

¶37

and he should be permitted to work in the respondent - Board till he attains the age of 60 years.

¶38

5 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

On a question posed by this Court to the learned

¶42

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.

¶43

I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and

¶44

learned counsel for respondents.

¶45

It is not in dispute that in the similar situation,

¶46

the Tribunal has passed the award enhancing the 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

¶47

and dismissed the writ petition by relying upon several judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The judgment

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

passed by the Division Bench of this Court is not questioned by the respondents and it has attained finality.

¶51

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.

¶52

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 this Court stated supra , by following the said judgments this petition deserves to be allowed in the same terms.

¶53

During the course of arguments, learned counsel

¶54

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

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2025:KHC:38021 WP No. 18131 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

In view of the discussion made hereinabove, it is

¶59

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

¶60

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶61

O R D E R

¶62

i) The petition is allowed .

¶63

ii) The Memorandum dated 28.05.2025 vide

¶64

Annexure-F is hereby quashed.

¶65

iii) The petitioner is entitled to continue in employment under respondent - Board till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years subject to all the Rules and Regulations applicable to the employment of the petitioner.

¶66

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

¶67