Sri v G Gangadharaiah Vs Central Silk Board

SRI V.G. GANGADHARAIAH, S/O LATE GANGABORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, P2, BASIC SEED FARM, NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, BANASAGERI, HALIYAL, R/AT VADDARAKUPPE VILLAGE, BHAKTHARAHALLI POST, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 130

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. NAIK V.S., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

CENTRAL SILK BOARD BTM LAYOUT, MADIWALA, BANGALORE - 560 068. REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY,

¶15

THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, B.T.M. LAYOUT, HOSUR ROAD, MADIWALA, BENGALURU – 560 068

¶16

SCIENTIST-D, P2 BASIC SEED FARM, NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:20559 WP No. 10346 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

ORGANISATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, BANASAGERI, HALIYAL, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT - 581 329

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

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

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 17.03.2026 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND CONTINUE THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER AS SKILLED FARM WORKER (TS) TILL HE ATTAINS THE AGE OF 60 YEARS TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.03.2026 to continue in service under the respondents till the petitioner completes the age of 60 years, which according to the petitioner is the age of superannuation.

¶27

The petitioner has filed the petition in the light of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in

¶28

Central Silk Board vs Employees Union of Central Silk

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20559 WP No. 10346 of 2026

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Board & Another¹ wherein, in terms of the order dated 04.09.2024, this Court has dismissed the petition filed by first respondent Central Silk Board and confirmed the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court.

¶32

In terms of the award dated 01.04.2013, the Tribunal has held that age of superannuation of the Timescale Farm Workers of the respondent establishment would be 60 years and not 55 years as contended by the respondent.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the award passed by the Tribunal is not questioned by the respondents and it has attained finality.

¶34

Thus, the learned counsel would submit that the petitioner cannot be superannuated at the age of 58, and the petitioner is entitled to continue as the employee of respondent No.2 till the petitioner completes 60 years.

¶35

1 W.P. No.18693/2014

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20559 WP No. 10346 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Learned counsel for respondents would submit that though the Board of first respondent has passed a resolution to implement the order, with effect from the date of the order passed in Central Silk Board (supra) , the Board is yet to receive the approval from the Union of India for the decision taken by the Board. It is further submitted that since respondents are awaiting the decision of Union of India, from the perspective of the respondents the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal has not yet attained finality.

¶39

This Court has considered the contentions raised at

¶40

the bar and perused the records.

¶41

It is not in dispute that the award passed by the Tribunal enhancing the age of retirement to 60 years from 55 years is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Central Silk Board (supra) . It is further not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Timescale Farm Worker with respondent No.2. The petitioner has completed 58 years after the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the award passed by the Tribunal.

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20559 WP No. 10346 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

This being the position, the award passed by the Tribunal which is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court comes to the aid of the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled to the following relief:-

¶45

(i) It is declared that the petitioner's age of superannuation is 60 years.

¶46

(ii) The respondents shall not superannuate the petitioner treating the age of superannuation as 58 years.

¶47

(iii) Thus, the petitioner is entitled to continue in employment as Timescale Farm Worker under first respondent till the age of superannuation at 60 subject to all the Rules and Regulations applicable to the employment of the petitioner.

¶48

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with

¶49

the above observations and findings.

¶50

SD/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

¶51

LRS/CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74

Sri v. G Gangadharaiah v Central Silk Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri v. G Gangadharaiah v 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

M v Ganesh Prasad Vs M/s Ganesha and Co.

Sri Moin Khan Vs State of Karnataka

Official Liquidator of Vs M/S Black Rain Hospitality Private Limited

Vikrant Tyres Employees Union Vs the Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Uma Mahesh B L Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S N Sarpashayana Vs the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation