State of Karnataka v. Karnataka State Government Pharmacists Association

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2026WP/3843/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pay parity; pay fixation; change of pay as policy decision of Government; financial implications; Single Member vs Bench of Judicial and Administrative Members; Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal; Senior Pharmacists, Department of Health and Family Welfare Services vs Labour Department; Union of India v. P.V. Hariharan (1997) 3 SCC 568; certiorari under Articles 226 and 227; remand for fresh consideration; WP No. 3843 of 2021 (S-KSAT); HC-KAR; NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB; decided 01.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; the order of the Tribunal in Application Nos.3179 and 3180/2017 dated 24.07.2019 set aside and remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration; all contentions of the parties kept open; parties directed to appear before the Tribunal on 03.06.2026. ¶¶73

State of Karnataka Vs Karnataka State Government… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶73

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 24.07.2019 passed by the Single Member of the Tribunal, directing extension of pay scales involving financial implications, was sustainable, given that pay fixation/change of pay is a Government function and such matters require hearing by a Bench including a Judicial Member. +1 more

¶¶66

Court's answer

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in P.V. Hariharan (supra), the impugned order passed by the Single Member of the Tribunal requires to be set aside, with a direction to the Tribunal to hear and pass appropriate order by a Bench consisting of both Judicial and Administrative Member.

¶¶62

Ratio / Principle

Extension of financial benefits to the respondents would involve financial implication to the State; fixation of Pay and change of pay is a policy decision of the State Government, and entitlement to the same pay scale on parity is to be examined by the Bench of the Tribunal.

¶¶66

Key takeaways

The impugned order dated 24.07.2019 in Application Nos.3179 and 3180/2017 is set aside and remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law.ratio¶¶68

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (S-KSAT), High Court of Karnataka (Division Bench) — Pay parity/pay fixation. The State challenged the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 24.07.2019 in Application Nos.3179 and 3180/2017, by which a Single Member had allowed the applications of Pharmacists/Senior Pharmacists of the Health and Family Welfare Services Department seeking parity with the pay scales (Rs.10000-18150 per 2007 Pay Scales; Rs.20000-36000 per 2012 Pay Scales) extended to counterparts in the Labour Department under G.O. dated 30.07.2010, and had quashed the endorsement dated 15.03.2017. Held, in view of the law laid down in Union of India v. P.V. Hariharan, (1997) 3 SCC 568, the Single-Member order — involving financial implications for the State, pay fixation/change of pay being a policy function of Government — required to be set aside, with a direction to re-hear the matter by a Bench consisting of both Judicial and Administrative Members; entitlement on parity left for examination by the Tribunal Bench. Writ petition allowed; Tribunal order set aside and remitted for fresh consideration; all contentions kept open; parties to appear before the Tribunal on 03.06.2026.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

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

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 3843 OF 2021 (S-KSAT)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶12

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

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. B RAVINDRANATH, AGA)

¶15

AND:

¶16

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION (AFFILIATED TO KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION), REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI B.S.DESAI, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT O/O DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES COMPOUND, ANANDA RAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560009.

¶18

SRI K M MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI MUDDE RANGEGOWDA, WORKING AS SENIOR PHARMACIST,

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

VICTORIA HOSPITAL, BENGALURU-560002. R/AT NO.6, 4^TH A CROSS, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU 560022.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. RUPA B DEVARAJU AND SRI C BEERESH, ADV. FOR SRI SHARATH S GOGI, ADV. FOR R1)

¶24

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE AN ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ON 24.07.2019 IN APPLICATION NOS.3179 AND 3180 OF 2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND B) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

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

¶29

The petitioners-State Authorities in the Department

¶30

of Health and Family Welfare Services are before this Court questioning the order dated 24.07.2019 in Application Nos.3179 and 3180/2017 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (“for short, ‘the Tribunal’), whereunder the Tribunal passed the following order:

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

“(i) Applications are allowed and

¶34

endorsement bearing No. DPÀÄPÀ 274 ºÉZïJ¸ïJA 2014 dated 15.03.2017 at Annexure-A10 passed by

¶35

the 1^st respondent is hereby quashed.

¶36

(ii) Respondents are directed to extend the benefit of pay scale of Rs.10000-18150 as per 2007 Pay Scales and Rs.20000-36000 as per 2012 Pay Scales to the Senior Pharmacists of 1^st applicantAssociation, including the 2^nd applicant, with all consequential benefits.

¶37

(iii) The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶38

The Tribunal directed the petitioners herein to extend the benefit of pay scale of Rs.10000-18150 as per 2007 Pay scales and Rs.20000-36000 as per 2012 Pay Scales to the senior Pharmacists of the first respondent Association of the Department of Health and Family Welfare Services.

¶39

Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath for petitioners and Smt.Rupa B. Devarajua and Sri.C.Beeresh, learned counsels for

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Sri.Sharath S. Gogi, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

¶43

Perused the entire writ petition papers.

¶44

Brief facts of the case are that, the members of the first respondent as well as second respondent claimed that they are working as Pharmacists in the Health and Family Welfare Services Department. Under Annexure-A3, Government order dated 30.07.2010, the Labour Department by executive order created 55 posts of senior Pharmacists in the Pay Scale of Rs.10000-18150. The respondents claiming parity, filed the above stated applications and sought for extension of the same benefit, which was extended to the Senior Pharmacists in the Labour Department. The Tribunal under impugned order quashed the endorsement dated 15.03.2017 issued to the respondents and directed to extend the Pay Scale as noted above. Questioning the said order, the State is before this Court in this writ petition.

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Learned Additional Government Sri.B.Ravindranath

¶48

for petitioners would submit that the Government Order creating 55 posts of Senior Pharmacists in the Pay Scale of Rs.10000-18150 was modified by Government order dated 30.10.2017 and the same was brought to the notice of the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal issued direction to extend the Pay Scale to the members of the respondentAssociation.

¶49

Further, learned Additional Government

¶50

Advocate would submit that the relief granted by the Tribunal involves financial implication and further he submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decision of

¶51

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. P.V.HARIHARAN AND ANOTHER¹ has made it clear that fixation of Pay/Change of Pay is the function of a Government and the Courts and Tribunals cannot interfere with the same lightly. Further, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the Hon'ble Apex Court also observed that

¶52

1 (1997) 3 SCC 568

¶53

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

wherever the financial implication is involved, it shall be heard by a Bench consisting of at least one Judicial Member. Therefore, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal consisting of single member was not justified in allowing the application directing to extend the Pay Scale as noted above.

¶56

Per contra, Smt.Rupa B. Devaraju and Sri.C.Beeresh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 would contend that the Tribunal rightly directed to extend the Pay Scale on parity. Learned counsel would submit that the Pharmacists and Senior Pharmacists in the department of Health and Family Welfare Services perform the same and identical duty performed by the Pharmacists and Senior Pharmacists in the Labour Department. Therefore, they would submit that the members of the respondent-Association would be entitled for Pay Scale extended to the Pharmacists and Senior Pharmacists in the Labour Department. Further, it is also brought to the notice that the Government order

¶57

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

withdrawing Annexure-A3 dated 30.07.2010 was the

¶60

subject matter of Application Nos.1115-1127/2018 wherein the Government order dated 30.10.2017 withdrawing Annexure-A3 dated 30.07.2010 is quashed and the said order of the Tribunal was the subject matter of W.P.No.7600/2021 and the said writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous by order dated 11.09.2023. Therefore, they would submit that there is no merit in the writ petition and pray for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶61

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

¶62

the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the considered view that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in P.V.HARIHARAN (supra), impugned order passed by the Single Member of the Tribunal requires to be set aside with a direction to the Tribunal to hear and pass appropriate order by a Bench consisting of both Judicial and Administrative Member.

¶63

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:17729-DB WP No. 3843 of 2021

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

The respondents have sought for extension of financial benefit that was extended to the Pharmacists and

¶66

Senior Pharmacists in the Labour Department. The extension of financial benefits to the respondents i.e., Pharmacists and Senior Pharmacists would involve financial implication to the State. Moreover, the fixation of Pay, change of pay etc., is the policy decision of the State Government. However, whether the respondents would be entitled for extension of same Pay Scale extended to the Pharmacists and Senior Pharmacists in the Labour Department on parity is to be examined by the Bench by the Tribunal.

¶67

Therefore, we deem it appropriate to set aside

¶68

the impugned order passed by the Tribunal dated 24.07.2019 in Application Nos.3179 and 3180/2017 and to remit back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

¶69