Dr Naveen Chandra Kulal B Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 23750 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

DR. NAVEEN CHANDRA KULAL B S/O. UMESH KULAL .B, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT CHINMAY HOUSE, OPPOSITE PATTUMAUDI SOUDHA, KODIBAIL, MANGALORE-575 003.

¶11

DR. VASUDEVA S/O. K. VIGHNARAJA UPADYA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT SUNANDA, KORANGHAPADY, UDUPI-574 118.

¶12

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

DR. DEEPAK S. V. S/O. LATE VADILAL, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3818, LAKSHMEESHANAGARA, KADURU TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 548.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. C M NAGABHUSHANA, ADV. FOR SRI M.S. RAJENDRA, ADV.)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES,

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶21

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 009.

¶22

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.

¶23

DR. VIDYA SHANKARAPPA YADALLI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, W/O DR.M.P. GADAG WORKING AS SPECIALIST GENERAL HOSPITAL, BYALAHONGALA BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶24

DR. HIFUR REHMAN MULLAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O SRI MOHAMMAD MECRAN WORKING AS SPECIALIST GENERAL MEDICINE R/AT MUSLIM KERE, C/O B.B. ZULEKHA NO.7-47, NEAR JAMIA MASJID, SHIROOR, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶25

DR. BRAMARAMBHA T.S. AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS D/O LATE SRI SHANTHARAJU T.C. WORKING AS SPECIALIST SKIN AND DERMOTOLOGY LEPROSY HOSPITAL, MAGADI ROAD R/AT RATHNAMMA, NO.637 TALUK OFFICE ROAD, T. NARASIPURA, MYSURU DISTRICT.

¶26

DR. MAHESH KUMAR Y N AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

S/O SRI NARAYANACHARI WORKING AS SPECIALIST (GENERAL SURGEON) NAVODAYA MEDICAL COLLEGE R/AT SRI. GURUKRUPA NEAR TOWN HALL CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

¶31

DR. RAJU G AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O SRI. GANGATHIMMAIAH WORKING AS SPECIALIST GENERAL HOSPITAL, DODDABALLAPURA BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

¶32

DR. RAMESH BABU E AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAPPA WORKING AS SENIOR MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTER KURBUR, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

¶33

DR. G.V. ARUNKUMAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O SRI VENKATACHALAIAH N WORKING AS SPECIALIST (ANAETHESIOLOGIST) C.V. RAMAN HOSPITAL INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE.

¶34

DR. V. ANANDKUMAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O LATE VEERABHADRAPPA WORKING AS GENERAL SURGEON GENERAL HOSPITAL SOMWARPET, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶35

DR. SRINIVASALU AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O SRI D. CHINNA SUBBA RAO WORKING AS SPECIALIST (ORTHOPEDICS), DISTRICT HOSPITAL, DHARWAD.

¶36

DR. SANGEETA AGDI AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS W/O DR. NAGANATH HULSOORE

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

WORKING AS LADY MEDICAL OFFICER, GENERAL HOSPITAL, HUMNABAD, BIDAR DISTRICT.

¶40

…RESPONDENTS

¶41

(BY SRI. V SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3 NOTICE TO R4 TO R13 D/W)

¶42

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI THEREBY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 17.05.2023 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.720-733/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AS ILLEGAL AND VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; II. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI THEREBY QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 30.05.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ETC.

¶43

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

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶45

ORAL ORDER

¶46

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

¶47

The petitioners are before this Court, aggrieved by the order dated 17.05.2023 in Applications No.720733/2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore (for short “Tribunal”) refusing to quash the endorsement dated 30.05.2018 vide Annexure-

¶48

A-18, whereunder the petitioners’ request for pay protection and counting of seniority prior to their reappointment is rejected. The Tribunal also rejected the

¶49

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

petitioners’ request for issuance of mandamus to consider release of salary from 01.01.2004 to 04.08.2014 for the contract appointment till they were regularly re-appointed as per the revised merit list.

¶52

Heard Prof.C.M.Nagabhushana, learned counsel for

¶53

Sri.M.S.Rajendra, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA Sri.V.Shivareddy for respondents No.1 to 3. Perused the entire writ petition papers.

¶54

It is the case of the petitioners that they were

¶55

initially appointed to the post of Medical Officers and Dental Officers during June 2000 in terms of the selection through Karnataka Public Service Commission (for short ‘KPSC’) on the basis of rural weightage. It is submitted that on striking down of Rule 3B of Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977 (for short “1977 Rules”), the Rules called “Karnataka Civil Services (Absorption of the persons appointed to the State Civil Services with the benefit for Rural Weightage)(Special)

¶56

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

Rules 2003 (for short “2003 Rules”) was promulgated and in terms of the said rules, the petitioners were reappointed by notification dated 05.08.2004. It is the contention of the petitioners that their pay is to be protected from the date of their initial appointment and the services rendered

¶59

prior to their re-appointment on 05.08.2004 shall be counted for seniority and all other purposes. The Tribunal, under impugned order rejected their prayer holding that they would be entitled for all benefits and seniority from the date of their re-appointment in terms of 2003 Rules. Questioning the said order as well as the impugned endorsement, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶60

Learned counsel Sri.Nagabhushana would contend that the petitioners rendered continuous service. Therefore, they would be entitled for all benefits from the date of their initial appointment. Though their appointments were terminated, on setting aside of Rule 3B of 1977 Rules, however, they were continued on contract basis and subsequently they were re-appointed on

¶61

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

05.08.2004. Therefore, he submits that since the petitioners were continuously in service, they would be entitled for protection of their pay and they would be entitled for counting of service rendered by them prior to reappointment for the purpose of seniority and for all other purposes. Learned counsel for the petitioners would invite attention of this Court to the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in SREEDHARA S v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER reported in (2002) 9 SCC 441 to contend that the Hon’ble Supreme Court permitted re-appointment of candidates who were otherwise entitled to be appointed even after excluding the weightage given under Rule 3B of 1977 Rules. Thus, he would pray for allowing the writ petition.

¶64

Per contra, learned AGA would support the order passed by the Tribunal. By referring to Rule 4 of 2003 Rules, learned AGA would submit that Rule 4 of 2003 Rules denies the service rendered prior to the reappointment and he also submits that in terms of Rule 4,

¶65

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

the pay of the absorbed persons shall be fixed at the minimum of the time scale of pay of the post to which they are absorbed. Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶68

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶69

and learned AGA for respondents, we are of the opinion that the petitioners have not made out any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.

¶70

There is no dispute with regard to appointment of petitioners with rural weightage on 23.06.2000 and 26.06.2000 through selection by the KPSC as Medical Officers and Dental Officers in the Health and Family Welfare Department. On striking down Rule 3B of 1977 Rules, the petitioners were terminated, however, they were continued on contract basis. Subsequently, the State Government made 2003 Rules and in terms of 2003 Rules, The Special Selection Committee prepared additional select list, and in terms of the said select list, the

¶71

9 -

¶72

NC: 2026:KHC:20471-DB WP No. 23750 of 2025

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

petitioners were appointed afresh under notification dated

¶75

05.08.2004.

¶76

Rule 4 of 2003 Rules reads as follows:

¶77

4. Leave, Seniority, Pay and Pension of the persons absorbed:

¶78

(1) The service rendered by the persons absorbed under these rules prior to the date of such absorption shall be taken into consideration for determining their leave and pension but shall not be considered for the purpose of pay and seniority.

¶79

(2) The pay of the absorbed persons shall be fixed at the minimum of the time scale of pay of the post to which they are absorbed.

¶80

In terms of the above rules, service rendered by the persons absorbed under these rules prior to the date of such absorption shall be taken into consideration for determining their leave and pension, but the said service shall not be considered for the purpose of pay and seniority. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of 2003 Rules also specifies that the pay of the absorbed persons shall be fixed at the minimum of time scale of pay to the post to which they are reappointed or absorbed. Thus, in terms of

¶81