Allowed¶82

The Central Silk Board Employees Union R v. the Central Silk Board

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2025WP/30479/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Central Silk Board; Time Scale Farm Workers; retirement age enhancement 55 to 60 years; CGIT award dated 01.04.2013; W.P.No.18693/2014 Division Bench confirmation dated 04.09.2024; discharge at age 58; representations since September 2024; contemplation of Special Leave Petition; writ of mandamus to consider representations within 3 months; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; Indian Trade Unions Act 1923; Central Silk Board Act; High Court of Karnataka; Anant Ramanath Hegde, J.; trade union petition; superannuation age.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus directing the respondent Board to consider the petitioners' representations within 3 months from receipt of certified copy of the order and to communicate the decision taken to the petitioners. ¶82

The Central Silk Board Employees Union R Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶82

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-Board is bound to consider the representations submitted by petitioner Nos. 2 to 33 seeking continuation in employment of the Central Silk Board till they attain the age of 60 years, in view of the CGIT award enhancing the retirement age which has been confirmed by the Division Bench.

¶59

Court's answer

As of now the order dismissing W.P.No.18693/2014 is not yet questioned and the order at Annexure-A enhancing the age of retirement from 55 to 60 years stands; therefore the representations submitted by the petitioners have to be considered in the manner known to law.

¶79

Ratio / Principle

A writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to consider the representations within 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, and the decision taken is to be communicated to the petitioners.

¶83

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by the Central Silk Board Employees Union and petitioner Nos. 2 to 33, Time Scale Farm Workers of the Central Silk Board who were discharged on attaining the age of 58 years. A CGIT award dated 01.04.2013 (Annexure-A) had enhanced their retirement age from 55 to 60 years; the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18693/2014, by order dated 04.09.2024, dismissed the challenge and confirmed the award. The petitioners' representations submitted since September 2024 for continuation in service till 60 years remained unconsidered; the Board stated it was contemplating a Special Leave Petition and required statistical data. Holding that the Division Bench order was not yet questioned and the award enhancing retirement age stood, the Court (Anant Ramanath Hegde, J.) allowed the petition and issued a writ of mandamus directing the Board to consider the representations within three months of receipt of certified copy and to communicate the decision to the petitioners.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 30479 OF 2024 (L-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE CENTRAL SILK BOARD EMPLOYEES UNION ® A REGISTERED TRADE UNION REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONA OF INDIAN TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1923 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.150 SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD, NEAR RELIANCE TOWER, KODATHI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 035, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

S SHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O SWAMY, CSR AND T, MYSURU.

¶11

Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

M.Y RAMESHA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O R YATHIRAJAIAH, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶13

T C CHIDANANDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O THOMMANNA, REC, CSB CHITRADURGA.

¶14

N T VENKATESHA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O THIMMEGOWDA, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶16

P.S BABU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O P.N SRINIVASAIAH, SILKWORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, CHINTAMANI.

¶17

K SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O K JAYARAMANAIDU, SILKWORM, SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, CHINTAMANI.

¶18

SREEKANTACHARI, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,. S/O KALACHARI, BASIC SEED FARM, GAVIMATA, K.R PET.

¶19

RUKAMANGADA RAJA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶20

M NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶21

K KALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LATE KALAIAH, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶22

C JAYANNA

¶23

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O CHIKKAVIRAIAH SSPC, RAMANAGARA.

¶24

THAMMANNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O CHENNEGOWDA,

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶26

SILK WORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, MYSURU.

¶27

C. H . VENKATESH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O HANUMANTHA SHETTY SILKWORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, K R NAGAR.

¶28

B J MAHADEVA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O JAVAREGOWDA, CSR AND RI, MYSURU.

¶29

ERANNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O HONNALAGA SHETTY, CSR AND RI, MYSURU.

¶30

K SHIVALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O KARIYAPPA, SILKWORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, K R NAGAR.

¶31

K BHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O KARIYAPPA, SILKWORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, RAMANAGARAM.

¶32

SHIVANNA N L, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LAKKAIAH, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶33

Y.N NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O NANJAPPA, SILKWORM SEED PRODUCTION CENTRE, HINDUPUR.

¶34

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶36

D ANJINYELU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O D RAMUDU, BASIC SEED FARM, PARIGI.

¶37

SANNASWAMY,

¶38

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O KALAIAH, BASIC SEED FARM, GAVIMATA, K R PET.

¶39

H N RAMAKRISHNA, S/O LINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶40

BASAVARJU AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O G MANCHAIAH SILKDOWN SEED TECHNOLOGY, LABORATORY, KODATHI,

¶41

RUDRAPPA M N, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O NANJUNDAPPA, SSPC, CHINTAMANI.

¶42

SIDDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O BYATA NAIKA, CSR AND TI, MYSURU.

¶43

M.S SUNDARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O P M SHIVASWAMY, RSRS, CSB,CHAMARAJANAGAR.

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶45

SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O SIDDAMADAIAH RSRS, CSB, CHAMARAJANAGAR.

¶46

K KRISHNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O KEMPEGOWDA, RSRS, CSB, CHAMARAJANAGAR.

¶47

WILSON BABU,

¶48

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O DEVAIAH, SILKWORM SEED TECHNOLOGY, LABORATORY, KODATHI.

¶49

R PADMANABHA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O SATHYANARAYANA RAJU, BASIC SEED FARM, PARIGI.

¶50

C M JAYARAMU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S.O MANCHEGOWDA, SSPC, RAMANGARAM,

¶51

K MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O ESWARAPPA, SSPC, HINDUPURA,

¶52

PETITIONER NOS.2 TO 33 ARE ALL DISCHARGED FROM SERVICE ON ATTAINING THE AGE OF 58 YEARS AND ALL THESE PETITIONERS CAN ALSO SERVED THROUGH SRI. BASAVARAJU, NO.150, SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD, NEAR RELIANCE TOWER, KODATHI, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGLAURU 560 035.

¶53

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI NAIK V S, ADVOCATE)

¶54

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶55

AND:

¶56

THE CENTRAL SILK BOARD, (AUTONOMOUS BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER CENTRAL SILK BOARD ACT), C.S.B COMPLEX, B.T.M LAYOUT, MADIWALA , BENGALURU - 560 068, REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

¶57

…RESPONDENT

¶58

(BY SRI NARASIMHA SWAMY N S, ADVOCATE)

¶59

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT BOARD PERTAINING TO THE ORDERS OF DISCHARGE PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT BOARD AGAINST THE PETITIONER NOS.2 TO 33 AND GRANT THE THEM THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS. DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT BOARD TO CONTINUE THE PETITIONER NOS. 2 TO 33 IN EMPLOYMENT OF THE CENTRAL SILK BOARD TILL THEY ATTAIN THE AGE OF 60 YEARS BY DULY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TRUE COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED MARKED AS ANNEXURES - C, G1, H1, J1, K1, L1, M1, N1, P1, Q1, R1, S1, T1, V1, W1, X1, Y1, Z1, AA1, AB1, AC1, AD1, AE1, AF1, AG1 AH1, AI1, AJ1, AK1 AL1, AM1, AN1, AO1 RESPECTIVELY WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFIT.

¶60

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

¶61

¶62

NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶63

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶64

ORAL ORDER

¶65

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶66

The petitioners No.2 to 33 are admittedly the Time Scale Farm Workers of the respondent-Board. Petitioner No.1 is the Union of the employees of the respondent. Time Scale Farm Workers sought enhancement of retirement age from 55 to 60 years. The claim was referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cumLabour Court (for short ‘CGIT’).

¶67

The CGIT in terms of the award dated 01.04.2013, enhanced the age of retirement from 55 to 60 years. This order is marked at Annexure-A.

¶68

The validity of the said order is called in question

¶69

by filing Writ Petition before this Court. The Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18693/2014 in terms of the order dated 04.09.2024 dismissed the Writ Petition confirming the order

¶70

¶71

NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶72

of CGIT. The resultant position is petitioners No.2 to 33 will attain age of superannuation at the age of 60 years.

¶73

Hence, the petitioners have submitted

¶74

representations to the respondent. The representations have been submitted since September-2024. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the representations have not been considered yet.

¶75

Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent is contemplating the filing of Special Leave Petition challenging the order passed in W.P.No.18693/2014. It is also his further submission that to consider the representations, some statistical data is required and it requires some time to consider the representations.

¶76

This Court is of the view that as of now, the order dismissing the W.P.No.18693/2014 is not yet questioned and order at Annexure-A enhancing the age of retirement from 55 to 60 is not yet considered. Thus, the representations

¶77

¶78

NC: 2025:KHC:639 WP No. 30479 of 2024

¶79

submitted by the petitioners have to be considered and in the manner known to law.

¶80

8. Hence the following:

¶81

ORDER

¶82

(a) The Writ Petition is allowed .

¶83

(b) Writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent to consider the representations within 3 months from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order, and decision taken in this behalf is to be communicated to the petitioners.

¶84

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

¶85

GVP

¶86

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56

The Central Silk Board Employees Union R v. the Central Silk Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Central Silk Board Employees Union R v. the Central Silk Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hanumantharayapa Vs the Chief Traffic Manager

M/S. Sungeomatics Engineering Services Private Limited Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner- II

M/S Ardex Endura (India) Private Limited Vs Sri Saravanan v

Ramappa Lakshmappa Kolur Vs the Divisional Controller

The Managing Director Vs D Parashuram

Sri T Manjunath Vs the Principal