Krisan Lal Vs the Central Silk Board

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:23477 WP No. 10948 of 2026

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 10948 OF 2026 (L-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

KRISAN LAL S/O DESH RAJ, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, SKILLED FARM WORKER (T/S), REGIONAL SERICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, LAXMIPUR, SAHAS PAR POST, DEHRADUN, UTTARAKHAND-248 197 AND R/AT WARD NO. 8. SALARIA MOHALLA, SAJANPUR POST, TEHASIL, PATHANKOT, PUNJAB-145 023

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI

¶11

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. NARAYANA BHAT MOVVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

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

¶15

THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILESGOVT. OF INDIA PAMPORE, JAMMU AND KASHMIR-192 121

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:23477 WP No. 10948 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

SCIENTIST-C (IN CHARGE) REGIONAL SERICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILES-GOVT. OF INDIA SAHASPUR, DEHRADUN UTTARAKHAND-248 197.

¶20

THE SCIENTIST- D REGIONAL SERICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, CENTRAL SILK BOARD, MIRAN SAHIB, JAMMU-181 101

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

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

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO(A) QUASHING CLAUSE A 11 OF THE MEMORANDUM CSBRSRS/GEN.CORRSWORKERS/2015-16/2423 BEARING NO. DATED 30.03.2016 ISSUED BY THE 4^TH RESPONDENT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS AGE OF RETIREMENT IS ON ATTAINING AGE OF 58 YEARS 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 B AND ALSO SEC.18 (3) (D) OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 AND ARTICLE 14 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:23477 WP No. 10948 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

This Writ Petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.03.2026 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.

¶30

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

¶31

Central Silk Board vs Employees Union of Central Silk Board & Another¹ wherein, in terms of the order dated 04.09.2024, this Court has dismissed the petition filed by respondent No.1-Central Silk Board and confirmed the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cumLabour 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

1 W.P. No.18693/2014

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:23477 WP No. 10948 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

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.

¶38

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.1 till the petitioner completes 60 years.

¶39

Learned counsel for respondents would submit that though the Board of respondent No.1 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.

¶40

This Court has considered the contentions raised at

¶41

the Bar and perused the records.

¶42

5 -

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:23477 WP No. 10948 of 2026

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

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 in the case of Central Silk Board supra . It is further not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Timescale Farm Workers with respondent No.1. The petitioner has completed 58 years after the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the award passed by the Tribunal.

¶46

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:

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50