IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2339 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010
PRESENT
THE HONBLE 1V{R.JUS'I'ICE V.G.SABHAV§I.I"F~OV:----I: f _
AND
THE HON'BLE MRs.JUST'IcE_ B.V.. A 1-' I T
WRIT PETITION NO. 46724 OE20_03 A
BETWEEN
1.
THE STATE OF ' _
REE, BY ITS SECRETARY'TG;,C=OV-- 'I _
FOREST DEPT. K.G.S.,--MS; 'BLD--G_.; v S
BANGALORE+--~1. 2 1
THE"PRINACT;1PA}L?:CHIEF'-CONSERVATOR
OFFOREST; VAIRANYA 'BHAVIIN,
MALLESHV'.?AR4'WI,'I» _ "
BANGI,AQRE~=.3."~ _ "=
THE DEI5UTY'cONSEEvAT0R OF FORESTS,
_»S3QcI;AL_FoRESTRyv DIVN., CHICKMAGALURI
"'THE_vACC_O"UNTANT--GENERAL IN KARNATAKA
A &*E}'. BANGALORE~ 1.
...PET'ITIONERS
(Bf'EM'T,V SEEELA KRISHNA, AGA]
E
C. JEEVARATI-{NE GOWDA,
S / O CHANNABASAVEGOWDA.
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
RETIRED FIRST DIVN. ASST..
RESIDING AT NO.25, M.I.G.--I,
1 STAGE, III MAIN ROAD,
V CROSS, K.H.B. COLONY.
JYOTHINAGAR POST.
CHICKMAGALUR -- 57'? 103.
Z 3 ,.':ai«:'sifiO't*J§':31$1'1'
{BY SMT.M.R.SHAN'i'HA KUMAR1,'A:)v_.,3 ' «.
TI-{IS WP IS FILED UN1*31€jP_ARi'1c_LEs'2:2és--; 54:" '22? OF" '
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA=._l?§8AYING-- T0' QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 10.10,;2002 PASSEDBY THEHQ.N'BLE KAT
IN APPLICATION NO. 9.28:3 / 2:00 g..V1pE_ 'ANNEX.A.
THIS wpy COMING" THIS DAY.
SABI-IAHIT J, FQL.I,O.W1_NG:=-Z. *
filed by the respondent -- State
in Ap_p1icatiOi1 2001 on the file on the Central
Adt;1ir;ist1*tative”V’I”ribur1a1. Bangalore (hereinafter called
‘fig for short] being aggrieved by the Order cit.
wherein the Tribunal has set aside the
genddrsement issued by the petitioners herein as per
Anfiexure ‘A2’ dt. 20.10.2001 by holding that Annexure
W
‘A2′ has no legs to stand and has to be quashed.
Pension sanctioned to the Applicant under Annexure –
agxl’ shall remain unaffected by anything that hastdone
under Annexure — A2. In the event of a1§iy”‘ree~o__Ve-ry’ _
pursuant to Annexure — A2, the “same to V.
refunded to the Applicant
p.a. from the date of reco’-;fei’-y’_ tillfitdateVof”pay1neVnt3 and’)
has granted time of the Adatevlpiofpfeceipt of
the copy of the order.
-¥f’he alliijespondentud”herein filed Application
Tribunal contending that he
hadput in Vinore than 36 years of service with the
responrderityp and h’e’Was promoted as FDA on 18.5.1985.
the age of superannuation and retired
His pension was fixed as per Annexure
at.c__ARs.3,9OO/– p.rn. Consequently, on the basis of
DCRG and Fmnily Pension to which the family
6%
4
member shall be entitled to in case of death of the
employee and commutation of pension was calculated.
However, by order dt. 20.10.2001, the pension graiited
was reduced from Rs.39OO to Rs.3,800. H
reduced to Rs.l,25,400/– insteadmof 2
the order was passed for recovery ._of..exeess Varn’o:i;;:.1f1t*::oi’
Rs.5,829/- on the ground that the pprorriotiont
applicant as FDA was subject_it’o:the final’-s_eVnio_r’5ity list of
FDA. Wherefore, theretpwas calculation of
pension as per Application was
resistedl”‘b3r.V.p:thelV’:p:etition”e’rs lheiein contending that the
promoti.on.’_ of as FDA on 18.5.1985 was
subject toi’the’fi.nalia’ation of the seniority list of FDA and
f?inaii..znation’,””i’t”Was found that the applicant was
noteligihlel”foijpromotion as FDA w.e.f. 18.5.1985 and
mistake that has occurred in Annexure
‘A1’ u}hil3e fixing the pension, DCRG and family pension
“leg
has sought to be corrected as per Annexure ‘A2’ which
is passed in accordance with law.
3. The Tribunal after considleriiig 5 _
contention of the learned courippsflel appeari:ng””ifor.V the”
parties by order dt.1O.1O.2OO2:’».hel;Vdtl*1a’t,_the”
was appointed as SDA inv’th«e__Forestl
28.8.1964 and was promote_dl:’a_s’iEDA.’w;e,.t. 20.5.1985
and he has comp1eted.,175_ -service as FDA
without any him. Having
regardtothei;proiii’s;ion$”-of Kariiataka Civil Service Rules
{Autoriiatic promotion to the senior
sca1C_0f pay)” R1ileiS*,._s the applicant was granted
atiitorflfiitic-. .grant”of”‘sVpecial promotion to senior scale of
of the pay scale of the Applicant being
anger the” mentioned in the schedule of the Rules
A1991″. v.V__iThe applicant retired from service on attaining
theiage of superannuation on 30.6.2001. Wherefore,
the pension, DCRG and Famiiy pension were fixed as
per Annexure ‘Al’ was justified. The same should
reduced and order at Annexure ‘A2′ was _.”citho’u.t”*–afn;r
basis and in identicai question regarding ofitirrie V
bound advancement examined the
Court in the case of &'”i
oas. Vs. UNION or I,N_n1A _&–1o’t§s’.”-~R¢poi?ted..mirage) 2
SCC 119 and accordingiiy’ promotion to
a seniority of
the of the number of
Years V05 cadre. A Government
servaritpmay’ at any time subject to the
eligibility criterion}. ifiimeidibound advancement Rules are
to alIev*iate the hardship caused to a
seijvant by not getting promotion even after
expiry of specified number of years of service,
“‘-.,constitu__t7ing the eiigibility. Wherefore, the Tribunal held
“”V’t3:1atf}°u1nexure ‘A2’ has no legs to stand and cannot be
‘~92?’
sustained legally. Accordingly, quashed Annexure ‘A2’
and held that appiicant is entitled to pension as
granted at Annexure ‘A1’ dt. 14.9.2001.
ordered that in the event of any recovery
Annexure ‘A2’ same shall have to be to ”
applicant with interest thereon at 9-1% the-..da.te
of recovery till the paymer_1t*.-._. Time for ‘e_orn_p1ia.nce off’
ninety days from the datep_Qf:’i”ecei_gpt .of”t1.1e order, was
granted. Being aggrieved order of the
Tribunal dt. ‘_:iQ_.10.2’OO2’i.:: therein have
sought” to “petition.” ‘ ‘
V_ ,have_ heard the Iearned Government
Advoeat.e ~.appeari’n’g’V for the petitioners. Notice was
respondent and respondent has appeared
through .coEunse1.
W
5. Learned Government advocate appearingfor
the petitioners submitted that since the promotio–nFof*
the respondent to the post of FDA from d’
subject to final seniority list to be p’ubiishe5d cxadrie
of FDA and after publication of ‘seniority
the cadre of FDA, it was foundetjhat he ‘was.
to promotion from 18..5.*1.985i;”Wwherefore. ‘the Ofder as
per Annexure ‘A2’ dt. correct the
mistake that the pension,
DCRG and ‘Anr1exure ‘A1’ dt.
iéiot justified in setting
aside implementation of the
pension, and pension quantified as per
dt. and ordered for refund of
with interest.
W
6. We have given careful consideration to the
contention of the learned Government Advocate”‘~.and
scrutinized the material on record.
7′. The material on reciord-yVAc>jjuI’d Lieariy’
that the respondent entered intdthe se1i’«7’i7C;V<E'.h:f'_o\tiit1"i;
petitioners as SDA w.e.f. he was
promoted as FDA afterhcompleting
the 15 years ofservice»; igivenAtheiibenefit of time
bound of service as he
completion of the
periodzoyf 1:5 Time Bound Advancement
Rules _Vandi'fnere. fa–ctA'i_ha*EiVthere is change in the seniority
aof Er-espondent;""'WouId not in any way affect the pay
_@s:;ai'est paid to the respondent as he has
re12.dere,d.–as– FDA and was thereafter was granted time
V"»»bound,_a:dVancement as per Time Bound Advancement
after having served for 15 years as FDA.
33%
10
Wherefore, the Calculation of pension as per Annexure
‘A1′ dt. 14.9.2001 holding that he had put in net
qualifying service of 36 years 10 months 2 days.dn_d~..he
is entitled to superannuation pension of
w.e.f. 1.7.2001, DCRG of Rs.1,_2.8,.7()0/~45’i’n*:ii;ttipv’_’su:n R
and in the event of his dezath;-Sitheiivspoiisie
Neelamma will be of-L’
Rs.1,560/– and comm.utatio.nVVV:of. pension’ of 1,300/–
out of pension of 176/ ~, is justified
and there is.fno_ Changing the
quantum’ pVension.V»p”–fixed’;’~’–DCRG amount, family
pension end’ of. pension and consequently,
the eondittion” as’, order at Annexure ‘A2′ dt.
V’ _ is hétseie’ss.
8,. order of the Tribunal having regard to
the afaof/e said facts, is unassailable and despite the
,,,.”_Sa,i_d”.–‘fact the State has chosen to file this Writ Petition,
We.
12
deposited within eight weeks from today before this
Court. If the cost is not paid within the time
the respondent shall make application for .
the order passed by this Court for».pay1ne_n.t”of u
ENS