IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. .
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY 93? EDEc1EM'E7E;R;'D~2¢.o9. " ~ A
BEFORE' A 5'
THE I-ION'BLE MR.JUsTO1¢E_RAEIVMDEDDEAREDDY
WRIT PETITIQE NoA;'-----1Vé'5'_1O"{)_.I¢' 2'O09..(Sv-ER)
BETWEEN
BGULLAGADDI _ _ -
AGE61YEARS _
S/O. GADAFPA U.I_{7._AGADD1_
RETIRED DEO.N:_ " '_
s NIG.ILINGAPPA'i?$OLLEGE
RAJAJINAGAR, BANGEALORE --- 10.
R/O. HOUSE NO388, 4TH"MAIN,
1 STAGE, 2.25:2 PHASE . "
MANJUNATHNAGAR: E?:;g3RE. PE'1"'£'I"IONER
A(B¥{s"R1; B 13 V.OB'23-.JA§§T_'_AI'f'r7lI, ADV)
BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 ".TI%IE PRINCIPAL
S. NIGILINGAPPA COLLEGE
2ND BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE ~»~ 10.
"[3 THE COMMISSIONER FOR
COLLEGIATE EDUCATKON
IN KARNATAKA, PALACE ROAD
BANGALORE. E
§,:~«\
.21....
4 THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR
COLLEGIATE EDUCATION DEPT.
BANGALORE «- 1.
5 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, _ 1' "
OF KARNATAKA r '
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT _
M S BUILDING, SACHIVAL}'..YA--_II;'
BANGALORE -1.
6 THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL
KARNATAKA STATE
BANGALORE .0 V RESPONDENTS
[BY SR1. GOUTAM & R1 0: R2]
[BY SMT. M CHAGASHRE-}$, HCGP FOR' R3 0: R4)
THIS§'1I?§E:ijfIjiIONj«IrII_{ED___.--UjNDER'"AR'I'ICLE 226 0; 227
OF OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE 'RES-ROND_ENTS"*TO'«.EULY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT HIS
UNAIDEI5 IE. HIS ENTIRE SERVICE EROM
A 1ij'.7i6v.'iWO_DATE""OF HIS RETIREMENT DATED 30.4.2004
V "PURPOSE OF HIS RETIREMENT BENEFITS: AND
R .. ""THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRLHEARING IN 'E'
2 A. G'ROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
_ 3-
ORDER
T he petitioner ciairns to be appointed.
in S.Nijalingappa coilege on
12.10.1989 transferred to an .
S.Nija1ingappa College
approved on 1.2.1990 by.4.i:ltiie”~3fd The
petitioner on attaininglhthe ‘supe’rannuation retired
from service ‘A15 «respondent-Regional
Director; Ijyeplartment, by order dt.
4. 1.2007 the qualifying service of
14 years._l_2 [though ought to be 19 days
acicortfiing to”the___1earned counsel for the petitioner) to fix
‘ Llthe peiisioiiary benefits, while declining the request of
” .the pVetiti’§_0lI..’.-;’er to consider the total qualifying service as
29.. 9 months 29 days, w.e.f.1.7.1976 to
_3O3.4.2O04. Aggrieved by the fixing of the pensionary
benefits reckoning the net qualifying service as 14 years
bi
-4-
2 months 29 days instead of 29 years 9 II101’11”,h’S–: 29
days, by excluding the non–grant period a
has presented this petition~”for–. pa ;
respondents to take into
institution from 1.7.1970 the d.ate._o_’f;
the purpose of pens’io_nar_s,=t’ber1efitjsaudit ‘fo’r’at”direction to
refix the pension at 12% pa. on
the arrearsv o’f«.p.p:ension.r§
2, for the petitioner contends
that *qnafifyipngi”«-Siéffi/ice to determine pensionary
benefits inclitides the period of service rendered by the
1.7.1976 to 1.2.1990, when the
2 not admitted to grant–in~aid. Learned
coiin’sel”piaces reliance upon the decision of a learned
it ” ‘Si.r1gie Judge in the case of v.’.r.s. JEYABAL &
OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, Annexure – ‘M’ in
WP. No.19431/2005 and connected petitions, D.D.p
13.10.2006, answering in the affirmative, the question
iii
-6-
Bangalore, who allowed the appeal in partpphji dt.
6.12.2007 AnneXure«M and remitted to
the Regional Director, C:o1’1″e’g”i’ate”-, xhfor’ 7. it
reconsideration. It is a pniatteéi’,of.V_record;pthvat
authority did not reconsiderV:Vp:th.e
thereon which Vfniaking a
r ep 1, E S e nt an on /go ivigfizhifih when not
responded:_”to’,’jA:’has -‘petition and therefore,
it is”§a”de1ay of one and a half
years, as cor1’i’e-rfi1_cied”h§f*the”iearned State counsel.
‘5: ” _HaV_iI1gA~.h’eard””the Learned Counsel for the
parties, thehpleadings and examined the order
the decision in V.’I’.S. Jeyabal’s case applies
it to the facts of this case, obligating the
S<tate"to.A«:i'eckon net quaiifying period of service of the
A. petitioner to include the period when the institution was
i not admitted to grant~«in–aid.
tik
-7-
5. The observations of the Apex Court..jin:’jSi’ATE
OF KARNATAKA & ORS. Vs. N. 4_
& 0RS.1 in the circumstances .isi*’appos4ite,V<" '4 V
"8. ms: At the se11i§.'.'_tiinei§"'.AK}e~tdo
not find any reasori-able'
confine the relief the
teachers % Court and
having regarel relief
relettefii' to of pay,
of ithnat c]_a€{f$. ofiteachers who
"" entitled to the
'–benefit:;:' -»t1:ot.»~4Witti1–standing that they have
it Court. XXX"
it i~.’_.TheV”ti’eAIay of 1 1/2 years in filing the Writ
earlnot disentitle the petitioner to a
d’etert:r1i;1A.:;ition of the correct pensionary benefits in
V’ .. aecordanoe with law.
‘2003 (I) SLR 251
-8-
In the result, the petition is allowed. ReSpon’d<ent
N035 and 6 are directed to refix the
petitioner for pensionary benefiigz-3. reckoning Vthe 'net'?
qualifying Service as 29 yearsa.".9b:'niontiis_i.and
and pay to the petitioner'-«.oifirreare "together
with interest at 69/5'..p.a. any event Within a
period of two monthsitiaei' of receipt of a
certified copy'«pf'this_ order. 3% _
JUDGE