High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Jayashree S Hiremath vs State Of Karnataka on 14 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Jayashree S Hiremath vs State Of Karnataka on 14 October, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
._--' _--... -. ........,.......... .-mm Wu." vr mm-m-mm n-zen-count or KARNATAKA Hzéri"

4 The Deputy Director of Public: Instruction

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 

CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

DATE!) THIS THE 14% DAY 01:' ocrorsfig   * *

BEF0RE%%j%% ¢   
THE HGPPBLE MR. JUs*ri«::E :£$d§I' 
w.P. NO. 14592; 2O(Vj'?..('S---RE::1)    "
BETWEEN:   "  

Smt. Jayashme S. Hizemam .  .V
Assistant Teacher, Age: 45' ycaIS,._  
HKE Society Boys High scno'c._ '
Ayyar Wadi, Asiffltmj  ' -  ~  '
Guibaxga - 585;1'€)2,_ C '- 2  * 'V   PETITIONER
(BY 3.321 :_£?iI}LE;f5PA"'E%i2?}RG{3R;,SMI'. S. SUSHEELA 85
   <;§I'§2VURzw_,JosH1,Aavs.)
AND :  ""  -  T: ":1:   " _ 

1 State Of KarI1ata.kai',v«_.  
by S6:-:.7_reté31'Y'   ' .. 
Educatiazl Dgpaufineni',
h.vi.'S._ Builcfislg," V '

 Bangaigre ~-- 

 " 2'  " * Statgé 'oi"!{éiz31ataka,

._  By .its..¢Unciez7..~Sccz*eta1y, E
= A 'Faducafionflepartment, 5
M. S. ~B1_1flding,
Bangalam -- 560 901. '

Ln ..u .

* r The Secretary,

V. _ R"¢g'ona1 Secondary School,

. Examination Board and

% Joint Director of Public Instruciian,
Gulizaagrga Division,
Guibarga - 585 I02.

5

Guiharga Bistzict,
Gulbarga~ 585 I02.

Lflnoi) H91" VYHIVMMUV Jn I\If'If\"\ I In-I I



"vs

. usaunl vr nunnu-unnn mu!-I QQAURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CC

eenskiered. Hence, a writ petition was flied and the wzjit-.petition

was disposed of éirecting the respondents to the

representation. Since the said representation was~.f:71ot.ee;ssiL1e’ie€i’_

contempt preeeedirzgs were inifiated. fFhe..authe1:itfie’s–iIvE;aiéeigiasseelij i

an order, a copy ofwhjeh is preduced st to

which the petitioner’s name hasibieep include-d_ &i1d”‘sfie..v;és else’

aémitted te grant-i11-a:£d. The siteulgi say that
her entitlement for _ _Q5.()8.2004. The
petitioner gives 3. 1e;3resenfatie>_I§§; is produced at
Annexure ‘L’. gra11t–i1:1~aid or the
eenefits from But however, an
endorsemc:iiti’V{éfias:ifissiieti a emf which is produced at
Annexure is not entitieti for any benefits

durzing gmxiaideet’ fer ifpsurpose fixation of pay, leave ané

‘:15eI2.sio1i…§)ri..A2:.n3ri«etherisehéiee benefits by Gevemment. The said

AiLt_iei§;11fes.is”«:11iesi:iGi;ed in this petition.

Iiheave: the reievant papers. Annexure ‘A’ indeed

it it ” ‘ea-etitzot be fésiited in as much as the petitioner will not be entitled

t%2;i9e?1:e”bei1efits durixzg unaided period in as much as until the post

.adi3:1ittec1 to the grant-i11–aid, the question of the petitioner
” ‘eisimi11g certain benefits would not arise. Indeed in so far as

V’ period for which the institution was not aémitted to the gran§:~;in~

aid, the petitioner is also met entitled for the fixation of pay, leave

–:/

. “-…… ‘fl …-mnnannxn rIu.7!’1 OF KARNATAKA HZGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CO

and pcnsi-an er any other service benefits by the Gqvcrnmcnt.
Hence, Axzmcxurc ‘A’ cannot be interfered. However; main

contention appears to be that she: shouid be ?é§Li’_.:.’§&?f1-113

the School Teachexs who have been

pumuant to AI11i¥.{‘:X1JiI’6 ‘F’. Imiérgrd, i-Aaizémzit’ V”-A”‘ t}:1é’–_ .1

response to Annexure ‘L’. In..__fa<:t«, ' T3'§1a3Lu\ 76:
considered the acme} zmuadt; 4 . petitioner.
Cimumstanctizs wouid V;»2'v?¥}nt};n.o1'iti<:;h§A;v1vve to consider
Amxcxure 'L' that she is grant~i11-aié. finom
24.03.2001. Coiisifqlfienfiigr, f<:$11Ac«::-:$é;%ii1g..(3%5§1{:r:

GjQ;;mmg

'¥'1ir§: x}§)ét.it%ao_ :1A$t:::1§éivs_ rejected. However, the respondsnts
shaii cengixigff Jaccordance with law. Annexure 'A'

stands; cc1;f;z'11i<itd._ V'

' " Ltearned Additional Government AdVOC3t{*'L' is

ofAppeara11c:e within four weeks.

5&3?

.4 Xfiggw

“‘, fRbv/141088/1?1008*