Prof T Subramanyam Vs State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

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

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 4250 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PROF T SUBRAMANYAM S/O T MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS WORKING AS PROFESSOR OF ENGLISH DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN WORLD LITERATURES, THE ENGLISH AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD - 500007, AND PARMANENTLY RESIDING AT KALANIKETHANA 4^TH STAGE 2^ND PHASE VIJAYANAGAR MYSORE – 570 032.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA BHAT M.,ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPT OF HIGHER EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT OF FINANCE VIDHANA SOUDHA DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶14

THE ENLIGSH AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD- 500605 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

UNIVERSITY OF MYSRORE REP BY ITS REGISTRAR CRAWFORD HALL

¶19

MYSORE - 570 005.

¶20

THE KARNATAKA STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY BY THE REGISTRAR MUKTHAGANGOTRI MYSORE – 570 006.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. G. RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2

¶23

SRI. T.P. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 & R-5 R-3 SERVED)

¶24

THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER AND QUASHING THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO. ED 78 UMV 2021 DTD 31.07.2023 PRODUCED AT ANNX-H ISSUED BY THE R-1 AND ETC.

¶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.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶29

“(a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, quashing

¶30

i) the communication bearing No. ED 78 UMV

¶31

2021 dated 31.7.2023 produced at ANNEXURE-H issued by the 1st respondent,

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ii) the communication bearing No. ET10/560/2018-19 (1) dated 7.10.2023 produced at ANNEXURE-H1 passed by the 2nd respondent, and

¶35

iii) the communication bearing No. ET 560/2018-19 dated 7.10.2023 produced at ANNEXURE-H2, issued by the 2nd Respondent, to meet the ends of justice.

¶36

(b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the Respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 to transfer the pro rata pension, EL encashment, service gratuity and other benefits of the Petitioner which are due to him for having worked for 16 years in the 4th and 5th Respondents to the 3rd Respondent, along with 10% interest from 3.6.2010 till the date the amount is remitted to the 3rd Respondent, consequent upon quashing the above orders, to meet the ends of justice.

¶37

(c) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case, including the costs of this litigation, to meet the ends of justice.”

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA

¶39

for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 and perused the material on record.

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner joined as a lecturer in English in Mysore University on 11.11.1994, in its Department of Studies in English, Institute of Correspondence Course and Continuing Education (ICC & CE). Department of Studies in English, Institute of Correspondence Course and Continuing Education was separated from respondent No.4 in the year 1996 an autonomous university came into existence, which is Karnataka State Open University (KSOU) – respondent No.5. The services of the petitioner were also transferred to the KSOU. He worked in respondent No.5 during the period between 11.11.1994 and 01.07.1999. Thereafter, petitioner was appointed as a Reader in English in respondent No.4 in terms of an order of the appointment dated 30.06.1999 at Annexure-A. After obtaining necessary permission from the Mysore University, the petitioner tendered technical resignation under Rule 252(b) of the KCSR for the purpose of being appointed as a Associate Professor in respondent No.3 by way of direct recruitment.

¶43

In pursuance of the aforesaid technical resignation submitted by him, the petitioner was relieved from respondent No.4 and was appointed as a Associate Professor in the respondent

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

No.3 – Department of American and Caribbearn Literature, School of English Literary Studies as per the appointment order dated 21.05.2010 at Annecure – C. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner reported to duty in respondent No.3. Since the petitioner has taken up employment with the respondent No.3 after submitting his application through proper channel and after getting duly relieved in accordance with law, the pension and other terminal benefits to which he is entitled to ought to have been transferred by respondent No.4 to respondent No.3, which has not been done so far by respondent No.4. The petitioner retired from service and attained the age of superannuation as Associate Professor in respondent No.3 after completing 14 years of service. The petitioner rendered 16 years service with respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶47

In pursuance of the same, respondent No.4 forwarded a note dated 08.07.2019 instructing to remit/transfer the pension contributions of its teaching staff, who have been appointed in other Universities. However, respondent No.1 issued a letter dated 31.07.2023 to respondent No.4 directing him to issue an endorsement to the petitioner informing him that his appointment in

¶48

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

respondent No.3 was in his personal interest and therefore, he will not be eligible to receive pro-rata service benefits from respondent No.4. Based on instructions of respondent No.1, respondent No.4 issued a letter dated 07.10.2023 to respondent No.3 communicating the above decision of respondent No.1 at Annexure-H1. Pursuant to the said letter, respondent No. 4 issued a letter to the petitioner informing him that there is no provision in the existing statutes to transfer pro-rata service benefits to other universities at Annexure-H2.

¶51

It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite him being entitled to the benefit under the old pension scheme since he had tendered technical resignation within the meaning of Rule 252(b) of the KCSR, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have rejected the claim of the petitioner by issuing a response/reply. The impugned response/reply at Annexures- H, H1 and H2 dated 31.07.2023, 07.10.2023 and 07.10.2023 respectively on the erroneous premise that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of pension under the old pension scheme for the service rendered by him in Mysore University by wrongly invoking Rule 235A of the KCSR, which were not applicable to the petitioner by placing reliance upon the

¶52

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

judgment of the co-ordinate bench of this Court (Dharwad Bench) in the case of Dr. Ratna R. Bharamgoudar Vs. the State of Karnataka – W.P.No.101347/2026 , who is before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶55

Per contra, learned AGA would support the impugned communications at Annexures- H, H1 and H2 dated 31.07.2023, 07.10.2023 and 07.10.2023 respectively and submits that there is no merit in the petition and in addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the statement of objections and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 fairly submits that they would take necessary steps pursuant to any decision to be taken by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in this regard and would act accordingly.

¶56

Before averting to the rival contentions, it would be necessary to extract the communications at Annexures- H, H1 and H2 dated 31.07.2023, 07.10.2023 and 07.10.2023 respectively as hereunder:

¶57

8 -

¶58

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

Annexure – H

¶61

<P£ÁðlPÀ ¸À PÁðgÀ À

¶62

¸ÀASÉå: Er 78 AiÀÄÄJA« 2021 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¸ÀaªÁ®AiÀÄ, §ºÀÄªÀÄºÀr PÀlÖqÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 31.07.2023

¶63

EªÀjAzÀ, ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¥ÀgÀ ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, ²PÀët E¯ÁSÉ (G£ÀßvÀ ²PÀët), ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ – 560 001. EªÀjUÉ, PÀÄ®¸ÀaªÀgÀÄ, ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå¤®AiÀÄ, ªÀiÁ£À¸ÀUÀAUÉÆÃwæ, ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉÃ,

¶64

«µÀAiÀÄ: ¸ÀÄ§æªÀÄtåA n., EªÀgÀÄ ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¸À°è¹zÀ ¸ÉÃªÁ CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀUÁð¬Ä¸ÀÄªÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ.

¶65

ªÉÄÃ®ÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ, ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ C£ÀÄ±Á¸À£ÀzÀrAiÀÄ°è PÀ°à¸À¯ÁVgÀÄªÀ ¤AiÀÄªÀÄzÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀgÀÄ ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ ««AiÀÄ°è PÀvÀðªÀå ¤ªÀð»¹zÀ CªÀ¢üUÉ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄªÀÅ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄªÀ ¦AZÀtÂ G¥ÀzÁ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖ ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀjUÉ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä CUÀvÀå PÀæªÀÄ vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆ¼Àî®Ä ºÁUÀÆ ªÉÄÊ¸ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀgÀÄ ¸Àé»vÁ¸ÀQÛ¬ÄAzÀ The Enblish and Foreign Languages University ºÉÊzÁæ¨Ázï, E°è ¥ÀqÉzÀ £ÉÃªÀÄPÁw PÀÄjvÁV ºÉÊzÁæ¨Ázï «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄªÉÃ ¤AiÀÄªÀiÁ£ÀÄ¸ÁgÀ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÀæªÀÄªÀ»¸ÀÄªÀAvÉ w½¸ÀÄªÀÅzÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀjUÀÆ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ »A§gÀºÀ ¤ÃqÀÄªÀAvÉ w½¸À®Ä ¤zÉÃð²vÀ£ÁVzÉÝÃ£É.

¶66

vÀªÀÄä £ÀA§ÄUÉAiÀÄ, ¸À»/¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üÃ£À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð, G£ÀßvÀ ²PÀët E¯ÁSÉ («±Àé«zÁå¤®AiÀÄ-1)=

¶67

9 -

¶68

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

Annexure H1

¶71

“ UNIVERSITY OF MYSORE

¶72

VISHWAVIDYANILAYA KARYA SOUDHA CRAWFORD HALL, POST BOX NO 406 MYSORE 570005

¶73

Dated: 07-10-2023

¶74

ET-10/560/2018-19 (1)

¶75

To, The Registrar The English and Foreign Languages University. HYDERABAD:500 007

¶76

Sir,

¶77

Sub: Transfer of Pension Contribution to Prof. T. Subramanyam -reg

¶78

Ref: Letter No.ED 78 UMV 2021 dated 31-072023 of the Under Secretary to Government Education Department (Higher Education), Bangalore.

¶79

*****

¶80

With reference to the above subject, Prof. T. Subramanyam of your University, who has earlier served in the University of Mysore from 11.11.1994 to 02.06.2010 and then he had appointed as Associate Professor in your university through proper channel. In the background of his appointment as Associate Professor, He was relived from the duty of University of Mysore on 02.06.2010.

¶81

Prof. T. Subramanyam is self-interestedly appointed to the The English and Foreign Languages University.

¶82

10 -

¶83

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶84

HC-KAR

¶85

Hyderabad by following proper procedure. In this connection, I am herewith directed by the Government Vide at ref above, to inform you to take appropriate action to settle all the retirement benefits as per rule to Prof. T. Subramanyam from your University by considering his service period in your University.

¶86

Yours faithfully Registrar

¶87

Copy to:

¶88

Additional Chief Secretary to Government Education Department (Higher Education), Karnataka Government Secretariat, M.S.Building, Bangalore.

¶89

Prof. T. Subramanyam, Department of Indian and World Literates School of Literary Studies, The English and Foreign Languages University, HYDERABAD:500007.

¶90

P.A. to The Vice-Chancellor/Registrar/Finance Officer, University of Mysore, Mysore.

¶91

Finance Officer, University of Mysore, Mysore.

¶92

Office Copy.”

¶93

ANNEXURE - H2

¶94

“UNIVERSITY OF MYSORE

¶95

VISHWAVIDYANILAYA KARYA SOUDHA CRAWFORD HALL, POST BOX NO. 406 MYSORE-570 005

¶96

Dated: 07-10-2023

¶97

ET-10/560/2018-19 (1)

¶98

11 -

¶99

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶100

HC-KAR

¶101

To, Prof. T. Subramanyam Department of Indian and World Literates School of Literary Studies The English and Foreign Languages University, HYDERABAD:500 007.

¶102

Sri,

¶103

Sub: Transfer of Pension Contribution to Prof. T. Subramanyam-reg

¶104

Ref: 1. Government Letter No: ED 78 UMV 2021,

¶105

Dated: 31-07-2023.

¶106

2. University letter No: ET05/144/2006-07 Dated:27-03-2023.

¶107

3. Your letter Dated: 18-08-2023

¶108

*****

¶109

As per the direction of the government vide at ref: (1) above regarding to the transfer of pensionary contribution to the English and foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, once again I wish to inform you that, as per the prevailing statues there is no provision for transfer of pension contribution in respect of University employees who are appointed to other Universities. However, an amendment has been proposed to the existing statutes making provision for transfer of pension contribution in respect of University employees who are appointed to other Universities. The said Statutes has been sent (ref:2) to His Excellency, The Governor of Karnataka & Chancellor of Universities through the Department of Higher Education, Government of Karnataka for the assent and the same has been awaited.

¶110

12 -

¶111

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶112

HC-KAR

¶113

Hence I hereby bring to your kind notice that, after the receipt of the assented Statutes, your request for the transfer of Pension Contribution shall be considered as per rules/Statutes.

¶114

Yours faithfully Registrar

¶115

As can be seen from the aforesaid communication, it is

¶116

an undisputed fact that the petitioner had joined Mysore University as a Lecturer in English in the year 1994 and that he had tendered technical resignation and joined the services of the respondent No.3 and reported his duty. In pursuance of the same, In pursuance of the same, respondent No.4 forwarded a note dated 08.07.2019 instructing to remit/transfer the pension contributions of its teaching staff, who have been appointed in other Universities. However, respondent No.1 issued a letter dated 31.07.2023 to respondent No.4 directing him to issue an endorsement to the petitioner informing him that his appointment in respondent No.3 was in his personal interest and therefore, he will not be eligible to receive pro-rata service benefits from respondent No.4. Based on instructions of respondent No.1, respondent No.4 issued a letter dated 07.10.2023 to respondent No.3 communicating the above

¶117

13 -

¶118

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶119

HC-KAR

¶120

decision of respondent No.1 at Annexure-H1. Pursuant to the said letter, respondent No. 4 issued a letter to the petitioner informing him that there is no provision in the existing statutes to transfer prorata service benefits to other universities at Annexure-H2. The communications at Annexures-H, H1 and H2 were issued summarily rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the erroneous premise that Section 235A operates as a bar for the petitioner to claim the benefit under the old pension scheme. The said reason assigned by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the impugned communications at Annexures-H, H1 and H2 are clearly incorrect and erroneous in view of the plain reading of Rule 235A, which reads as under:

¶121

“(i) A Government servant on permanent transfer to, or absorption in a Board or Corporation or Public Under taking or Government Industrial concern (hereinafter referred to as the said Organizations) shall be eligible for Pro-rata Pension and Deathcum-Retirement Gratuity, as the case may be, with reference to the pension rules by which he was governed immediately before such transfer or absorption. If, at the time of such transfer or absorption, the employee has put in less than ten years of qualifying service, he is not entitled to pension and therefore the question of proportionate pension will not arise. He will be eligible for

¶122

14 -

¶123

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶124

HC-KAR

¶125

only the proportionate service gratuity in lieu of pension and for Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity based on the length of his service.

¶126

(ii) The amount of pension/ gratuity and the DeathcumRetirement Gratuity shall be worked out and intimated to the employee as well as to the said organizations as and when he is so transferred or absorbed.

¶127

(iii) The Pro-rata Pension, Gratuity, and DeathcumRetirement Gratuity admissible in respect of the service rendered under Government would be disbursable only from –

¶128

(a) the date on which the employee would have normally superannuated if he had continued in Government Service;

¶129

Or

¶130

(b) the date on which he actually retired from the service of the said organization whichever is later.

¶131

Provided that in cases of voluntary retirement from the service of the said organizations as under rule 285 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules and those of retirement on Invalid Pension as under rules 273 to 283 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, the Pro-rata Pension, Gratuity etc., admissible in respect of the service rendered in the Government will be disbursable on the date on which the employee actually retires from the service of the said organization.

¶132

15 -

¶133

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶134

HC-KAR

¶135

(iv) Resignation from the service of the said organization will, for the purpose of these rules, be treated as resignation from Government Service, entailing forfeiture of the earlier service under Government and the loss of the pensionery benefits under these rules.

¶136

(v) Any further liberalization of pension rules decided upon by Government with effect from a date after the permanent absorption of the employee in the said organizations will not be extended to him.

¶137

(vi) Where an employee receives pension under clause (iii) above, and wishes to commute a portion of the pension, such commutation will be regulated in accordance with the rules in force at the time of such commutation.

¶138

(vii) In respect of the deputationist Government employee who opts for absorption in any of the said organizations such organization should take over the liability in regard to leave on average pay or earned leave that the Officer has to his credit at the time of leaving Government service and, in return, the Government shall pay to the said organization a lumpsum equal to leave salary for the leave on average pay/earned leave due to the Government employee on the date of his permanent absorption in the said organization.

¶139

(viii) The conditions mentioned in this rule will apply only where the permanent transfer from Government service to or absorption in the said organization is in public interest. In all other cases, Government will not accept the liability to

¶140

16 -

¶141

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶142

HC-KAR

¶143

pay any retirement benefits for the period of service rendered by the employee before his transfer.

¶144

(ix) If a Government Servant permanently absorbed in the said organization is continued in service or re-employed after the date mentioned in condition (iii) above, his pay shall be refixed as re-employed pensioner with effect from the date from which he becomes entitled to draw the Pro-rata retirement benefits.

¶145

(x) The parent Department of the Government servant shall be consulted before the issue of the order of absorption

¶146

(xi) It is not necessary to tender formal resignation in cases where it is declared by Government that the absorption of the employee is in public interest and the employee in turn gives his consent to such absorption.

¶147

[(xii)(a) The family of the Government servant, who has been permanently absorbed in the said organization shall also be eligible for family pension from the date following the date of death of the employee in addition to the benefit of family pension, if any, admissible under the rules of the organization:

¶148

Provided that, the benefit under this rule is also available to the eligible past cases of death while in service or after retirement, where the family pension has been settled as per the then existing rules. However, the financial benefits in past cases will be eligible with effect from the first of the month following the date of publication of this rules in the Official Gazette.]

¶149

17 -

¶150

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶151

HC-KAR

¶152

(b) The benefit of Family Pension will be admissible only to the families of those who were/are actually entitled to pension from the Government after their absorption in the said organization. This benefit will not be admissible to the families of those who get only the service gratuity, i.e., who are absorbed before rendering ten years of qualifying service under the Government.

¶153

[(c) XXX]

¶154

(d) The family pension admissible under the provisions of the Karnataka Government Servants’ (Family Pensions) Rules, 1964 2 [or Karnataka Government Servants’ (Family Pension) Rules,2002 as the case may be ] as in force on the date of absorption taking into account the pay as on the date of transfer/ absorption. [xxx]

¶155

(e) It will be the responsibility of the pension sanctioning authority to process the claim for family pension and forward it to the Audit Office for issue of necessary authority. [xxx]

¶156

(xiii) In all cases of absorption with the benefits of Prorata retirement benefits, the Finance Department should be counsulted before the issue of orders.]”

¶157

A plain reading of Rule 235A of KCSR will clearly indicate that the same would be applicable only to persons transferred or absorbed and the said Rule would have no application to the petitioner, who submitted technical resignation at

¶158

18 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶159

HC-KAR

¶160

the respondent No.4 – Mysore University while working as a lecturer in History and was thereafter appointed as a Associate Professor in respondent No.3 by way of direct recruitment. In other words, the petitioner was appointed as Associate Professor in respondent No.3 – The English and Foreign languages University, by way of direct recruitment, the Rule 235A would have no application since the same would apply only to cases of transfer or absorption and consequently, the impugned communications at Annexures-H, H1 and H2 issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2 deserve to be quashed and necessary directions be issued to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State to take appropriate decisions/pass appropriate orders pursuant to a letter dated 08.07.2019 at Annexure-G submitted by respondent No.4 within a stipulated time frame.

¶161

11. In Dr. Ratna's case supra, while dealing with Rule

¶162

252B of the KCSR, and in relation to the National Pension Scheme (NPS), co-ordinate bench of this Court held as under:

¶163

“1. The petitioner has approached this Court assailing the legality of denying the benefit of Old Pension Scheme (‘OPS’ for short) by respondents No.1 and 2-State,

¶164

19 -

¶165

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶166

HC-KAR

¶167

wherein by the impugned order, the State Government proceeds on an assumption that technical resignation under Rule 252 (b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, (for short ‘KCSR’) is inapplicable to the respondent No.3-Law University, treating her appointment as a fresh appointment governed by National Pension Scheme (NPS).

¶168

2. Brief facts:

¶169

The petitioner joined the Government service on 02.02.1999 as a lecturer under the Karnataka University, Dharwad well prior to the cut off date 01.04.2006. While in continuous service, she applied through proper channel to respondent No.3 – University. Upon selection, was relieved on 17.07.2013 under Rule 252(b) of the KCSR by way of technical resignation and she joined respondent No.3-Law University on the very same day without any break in service.

¶170

Considering the continuity of service, and the representation of the petitioner, the Syndicate of respondent No.3-Law University exercising powers under Rule 30 (xiii) of the Karnataka State Law University Act, 2009, resolved in its 40th meeting dated 30.10.2014, to extend the benefit of OPS. Pursuant thereto order dated 30.01.2015 was issued. After audit objection, the matter was reconsidered in the 86th Syndicate meeting dated 20.03.2021 and again resolved in favour of extending OPS, culminating in order dated 21.05.2021. However,

¶171

20 -

¶172

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶173

HC-KAR

¶174

respondent No.1 by the impugned dated 21.10.2024 rejected the claim holding that Rule 252(b) KCSR is not applicable to autonomous bodies and universities. Aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶175

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon Rule 252 (b) of the KCSR submits that the petitioner had joined Government service prior to 01.04.2006 and therefore, falls under OPS regime. It is submitted that, her appointment was through proper channel and by way of technical resignation under Rule 252(b) of the KCSR. It is submitted that, Rule 252(b) clearly stipulates that, the resignation to take up another appointment with proper permission is not a resignation from public service. It is submitted that the action of respondent No.1 in treating the appointment as fresh appointment is contrary to Rule 252(b) of KCSR and settled law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions

¶176

3.1. In the case of Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. Punjab National Bank1 , (Ramesh Chandra Sharma), wherein it has been held that where an employee moves from one post to another with permission and through proper channels, the said appointment cannot be construed as a resignation or a fresh appointment, but has to be treated as a past service, which needs to be protected.

¶177

21 -

¶178

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶179

HC-KAR

¶180

3.2. Further, he relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of G. Rabinathan vs. State of Karnataka2 (G. Rabinathan) to contend that the resignation tendered to take up another appointment with prior permission retains the character of technical resignation, preserving the service benefits.

¶181

3.3. He also takes support of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of C. Lalitha vs. State of Karnataka3 (C.Lalitha) to contend that the past service cannot be ignored for pensionary benefits.

¶182

3.4. He also submits that, based on the judgment of the Apex Court, this Court has held in the case of Dr S.N.Vasudevan vs. State of Karnataka and others4 (Dr. S.N.Vasudevan) and in the case of Sri H.Siddalinga Murthy vs. State of Karnataka and others5 , (Sri H.Siddalinga Murthy), observing that the technical resignation under Rule 252 (b) of the KCSR must be treated as a continuity of service for determining pensionary benefits including applicability of OPS.

¶183

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State submits that respondent No.3-Law University is an autonomous body, it does not come within the purview of Rule 252(b) of the KCSR and the impugned order is justified, and the

¶184

22 -

¶185

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶186

HC-KAR

¶187

petitioner’s appointment in respondent No.3 must be treated as fresh appointment governed by NPS.

¶188

5. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions urged and perused the material available on record.

¶189

6. The point that would arise for consideration is:

¶190

‘Whether the impugned order denying the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to the petitioner treating her appointment as fresh appointment is contrary to Rule 252(b) of the KCSR and whether the same warrant any interference by this Court ?’

¶191

7. In order to answer the point for consideration, it is relevant to extract Rule 2(1) of the KCSR, which reads as under;

¶192

“2. Application.—(1) Save as otherwise provided in these rules, this shall apply to all the persons appointed to civil services and serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Karnataka”.

¶193

8. It is also relevant to state the provision of 252(b) of the KCSR, which reads as under:

¶194

“252. (a). x x x x x x

¶195

252(b) Resignation of an appointment to take up, with proper permission, another appointment, whether permanent or temporary, service in which counts in full or in part, is not a resignation of public service.”

¶196

9. Rule 2(1) of the KCSR makes the rules applicable to

¶197

the persons appointed to the civil servants serving in connection with the affairs of the State. The material on record establishes that the petitioner joined Government Service prior to 01.04.2006, she applied through proper channel, she was relieved under

¶198

23 -

¶199

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶200

HC-KAR

¶201

252(b) KCSR and she joined respondent No.3 on the same day without breaking service.

¶202

10. It has also brought to the notice of this Court that the Statute Governing Delegation Of Administrative And Financial Powers, 2021, wherein under the powers conferred under Section 46 (20) read with Section 53 of the Karnataka State Law University Act, 2009, the Syndicate of Karnataka State Law University has framed a statute namely;

¶203

“1. Title and Commencement— x x x x 2 to 13. x x x x 14. Financial Mattes not specifically covered under this Statute shall be governed by the relevant principles of the Karnataka Financial Code, KCSR, Karnataka Treasury code, the Karnataka Contingency Manual, Karnataka Pension Manual and other financial rules of Government of Karnataka. The Administrative/Service matters not specifically covered under this Statute shall be governed by the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) rules, 1957, the Karnataka Civil Services (conduct) Rules, 2021 and any other rules, in mutatis mutandis, framed in this regard by the Government of Karnataka issued from time to time."

¶204

11. Statute 14 of 2021 statute of respondent No.3 specifically adopts KCSR and related financial rules mutatis mutandis. Therefore, the contention that - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2851 WP No. 101347 of 2026 KCSR is inapplicable to respondent No.3 is unsustainable.

¶205

12. The Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Sharma (supra), has categorically held that, movement through a proper channel could not be construed as a resignation or a fresh appointment and

¶206

24 -

¶207

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶208

HC-KAR

¶209

past service must be protected. Similarly in G. Rabinathan (supra) and C. Lalitha (supra) the Apex Court has recognized protection of past service and pensionary benefits.

¶210

13. This Court in Dr. S.N.Vasudevan and Sri H.Siddalinga Murthy (supra), has held that a technical resignation serves as a strategic tool within organizational framework, enabling seamless internal talent mobility while aligning with the broader talent management objectives. When an employee tenders a technical resignation, the calculation of past services is a critical aspect for determining entitlements such as pension benefits, which the respondent No.1 has arbitrarily denied. The syndicate of respondent No.3 twice resolved to extend OPS benefits. The State cannot override a valid statutory resolution without authority of law. Therefore, the impugned order proceeds on an erroneous assumption that Rule 252(b) is inapplicable to Universities and is contrary to statutory provisions and settled legal principles.

¶211

14. Accordingly, the point framed for consideration is answered and this Court pass the following:

¶212

ORDER

¶213

i. Writ petition is allowed.

¶214

ii. The impugned order dated 21.10.2024 (Annexure-R) issued by respondent No.1 is hereby quashed.

¶215

25 - NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶216

HC-KAR

¶217

iii. The respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to extend the benefit of ‘Old Pension Scheme’ to the petitioner reckoning the past service rendered, in accordance with law.”

¶218

In my considered opinion, the aforesaid judgment of

¶219

the co-ordinate Bench while dealing with Rule 252B is directly and squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case.

¶220

In the result, I pass the following:

¶221

ORDER

¶222

i) The petition is hereby allowed.

¶223

ii) The impugned communications dated 31.07.2023, 07.10.2023 and 07.10.2023 at Annexures-H, H1 and H2 issued by the respondents are hereby quashed.

¶224

iii) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 – State is directed to take appropriate decisions/pass appropriate orders pursuant to a letter dated 08.07.2019 at Annexure-G submitted by respondent No.4 and proceed further and pass appropriate orders and communicate the same to the respondent No.4 - Mysore University within a

¶225

26 -

¶226

NC: 2026:KHC:18635 WP No. 4250 of 2024

¶227

HC-KAR

¶228

period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶229

iv) Immediately upon respondent Nos.1 and 2 taking appropriate decision and passing appropriate orders as stated supra and communicating the same to respondent No.4 as stated supra, respondent No.4 shall proceed further and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of 1 month from the date of receipt of communication from respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State.

¶230

v) All other contentions urged by the petitioner including contentions regarding payment of interest for delayed pension etc., are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits of the said contention.

¶231

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶232

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

¶233

MDS

Prof T Subramanyam v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prof T Subramanyam v. State of Karnataka

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

Chethana S Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Agatha Mary Vs Sri Babu

Nagesh D R Vs Shree Beeralingeshwara Education Society (R)

Sri.R.J. Swamy Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K Rudreshappa Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. C J Latha Vs the Principal Secretary to the Government of Karnataka