Disposed¶46

State of Karnataka v. R M Mariswamy

Karnataka HC6 Mar 2026WA/1879/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ appeal; Karnataka High Court; Rule 235A Karnataka Civil Service Rules; Karnataka Civil Service Rules 1959; pension; gratuity; provident fund; counting of past service; junior government aided college lecturer; Karnataka State Financial Corporation; KSFC; Deputy Manager; endorsement dated 23.08.2016; W.P.No.3197/2017 (S-RES); WA No. 1879 of 2024; appeal disposed; representation to be decided within two months.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of without interfering with the learned Single Judge's order; appellants left open to consider and decide the 1st respondent's representation in accordance with law, preferably within two months; pending interim applications stand disposed of. ¶46

State of Karnataka Vs R M Mariswamy — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the Division Bench should interfere with the learned Single Judge's judgment and order dated 22.03.2024 in W.P.No.3197/2017 (S-RES), which directed consideration of the petitioner's representation for gratuity, provident fund and pension benefits. +1 more

¶46

Court's answer

Since the learned Single Judge's order contained only a direction to consider the petitioner's representation for gratuity, provident fund and pension benefits, and no positive direction to grant pension, the Division Bench found no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order.

¶46

Ratio / Principle

The learned Single Judge's order did not contain a positive direction to grant pension to the petitioner.

¶42

Key takeaways

It would be open to the appellants to consider the case of the 1st respondent and decide the representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ appeal by the State of Karnataka and the Karnataka Pre-University Board against a learned Single Judge's order directing consideration of a former aided-college lecturer's representation for counting 11 years, 9 months and 21 days of lecturership towards gratuity, provident fund and pension benefits under Rule 235A of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules. The Division Bench (per D K Singh, J.) observed that the Single Judge had issued no positive direction to grant pension, found no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order, and disposed of the appeal, leaving the appellants free to decide the representation in accordance with law, preferably within two months. The appellants' contention that Rule 235A of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules, 1959 does not apply to Karnataka State Financial Corporation employees was submitted but not decided by this Court.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:13842-DB WA No. 1879 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1879 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, (PRE-UNIVERSITY),

¶10

M.S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶11

THE KARNATAKA PRE-UNIVERSITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU -560003.

¶12

…APPELLANTS

¶13

(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA)

¶14

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

¶15

AND:

¶16

R M MARISWAMY

¶17

S/O LATE R.M MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WORKING AS MANAGER KSFC, MANDYA-571401.

¶18

THE PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, MURNAD, MADIKERE TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT -571252. REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. RANGANATHA S JOIS., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶21

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13842-DB WA No. 1879 of 2024

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND ALLOW THE WA BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-3197/2017 (S-RES).

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

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

¶28

On the previous date of hearing of this appeal, no

¶29

one has put in appearance. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

¶30

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.3197/2017 (S-RES) filed by the respondent No.1 herein.

¶31

The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

¶32

The petitioner was working as a Lecturer in a Junior Government aided College from the year 1985 till 1997.

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13842-DB WA No. 1879 of 2024

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The petitioner had rendered 11 years, 9 months and 21 days service as a lecturer in Junior Government aided College. The petitioner had resigned from the post of Lecturer and assumed the position of Deputy Manager at Karnataka State Financial Corporation, a State Government undertaking. The petitioner sought a direction from the writ Court to the respondents to compute 11 years 9 months 21 days, time spent as a lecturer in Junior Government aided College for the purposes of pension etc. However, his request came to be rejected vide endorsement dated 23.08.2016.

¶36

The learned Single Judge considering the scope of Rule 235A of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner on

¶37

his representation for payment of gratuity, provident fund and pension benefit.

¶38

Sri. Mohammad Jaffar Shah, learned AGA appearing for the appellants submits that the Karnataka State Financial Corporation does not give pension to its

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13842-DB WA No. 1879 of 2024

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

employees for the services rendered in the Corporation, since it not a pensionable service. Therefore, there is no question of giving pension to the petitioner.

¶42

We note that the learned Single Judge has only directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner for payment of gratuity, provident fund and pension benefits etc., but there is no positive direction to grant him pension.

¶43

It is further submitted that the Karnataka Civil Service Rules, 1959, apply only to the civil servants, i.e., the employees of the State Government. The Karnataka State Financial Corporation is an independent entity registered under the Companies Act and the employees of the said Financial Corporation are not the employees of the State Government. Therefore, the provision of Rule 235A of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules would not be applicable in the case of employees of the Financial Corporation.

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13842-DB WA No. 1879 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Considering the aforesaid fact that the learned Single Judge has only directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner for grant of gratuity provident fund and pension benefits etc., we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

¶47

It would be open to the appellants herein to consider the case of the 1^st respondent, and decide the representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two months from today.

¶48

In view of the appeal having been disposed of, pending interim applications, if any do not survive for consideration, hence stand disposed of.

¶49

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶50

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

¶51

NG CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

State of Karnataka v. R M Mariswamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Karnataka v. R M Mariswamy

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

The General Manager Vs the President

Mrs Vinodamma Since Dead Represented by Her L.R Sri. Suresh.S Vs the Managing Director

Sri K Harikrishna Vs Sri D v Manjunatha

Mysuru City Corporation Vs Smt C Devarathna

K Balaji Vs the Assistant General Manager State Bank of India

Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Limited Vs the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central)