Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri H R Jagadeesh vs The Government Of Karnataka on 12 July, 2022

Author: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav

Bench: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav

                             1


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

                         BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

         WRIT PETITION No.56217/2018 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

1.    SRI H.R. JAGADEESH
      S/O H.G. RUDRAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
      WORKING AS SELECTION
      GRADE LECTURER
      CIVIL DEPARTMENT
      SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY (AIDED)
      POLYTECHNIC, SUNKADA KATTE
      BAJPE,
      MANGALORE - 574 189.

2.    SRI DINAKARA
      S/O PARALA POOJARI
      AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
      WORKING AS SELECTION
      GRADE LECTURER,
      AUTOMOBILE DEPARTMENT
      SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY (AIDED)
      POLYTECHNIC, SUNKADA KATTE
      BAJPE,
      MANGALORE - 574 189.

3.    SMT. INDUMATHI
      D/O B. SAJEEVA KOTIYAN
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
      WORKING AS SELECTION
      GRADE LECTURER
      ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT
      SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY (AIDED)
      POLYTECHNIC, SUNKADA KATTE
      BAJPE,
      MANGALORE - 574 189.
                               2


4.     SRI UMESH CHANDRA A.P.,
       S/O THIMMAYYAN A.P.,
       AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
       WORKING AS SELECTION
       GRADE LECTURER
       SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
       SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY (AIDED)
       POLYTECHNIC, SUNKADA KATTE
       BAJPE, MANGALORE - 574 189.
                                          ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
       MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
       BENGALURU - 560 001
       REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       (DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION)

2.     THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION
       THANTHRIKA BHAVAN, PALACE ROAD
       BENGALURU - 560 001.

3.     THE PRINCIPAL
       SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY (AIDED)
       POLYTECHNIC, SUNKADA KATTE
       BAJPE,
       MANGALORE - 574 189.

4.    SRI NIRANJANA SWAMY EDUCATION TRUST ®
      SUNKADA KATTE, BAJPE,
      MANGALORE - 574 189
      REP. BY SECRETARY.
                                           ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. M.C. NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
    SRI SANATH KUMAR SHETTY K., ADVOCATE FOR R3
    R4 - SERVED)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO
CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.11.2018, ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY THE
R-2 ON 13.11.2018 UNDER ANNEXURE-J AND ACCORDINGLY GRANT
                                  3


PAY BAND IV SCALE TO THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 FROM 17.07.2013,
3RD PETITIONER FROM 25.03.2014 AND 4TH PETITIONER FROM
29.01.2015 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALL SERVICE AND MONETARY
BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONERS FROM THE SAID DATE.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

Petitioners have sought for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondent No.2 to consider the representation made by respondent No.4 to respondent No.2 on 13.11.2018 at Annexure-J and grant Pay Band IV Payscale to petitioners 1 and 2 from 17.07.2013, 3rd petitioner from 25.03.2014 and 4th petitioner from 29.01.2015 and extend all consequent service and monetary benefits from the said date.

2. Petitioners have been working in Sri. Niranjana Swamy (Aided) Polytechnic, Sunkada Katte, Bajpe, Mangalore, which is being administered by respondent No.4. Petitioners submit that they were entitled to Pay Band IV Payscale and respondent No.4 as per the recommendation at Annexure-J made to the Director of Technical Education 4 on 13.11.2008 has recommended the names of petitioners for extension of Pay Band IV Payscale

3. Learned counsel for petitioners has relied upon the Annexure to the recommendation at Annexure-J produced along with the memo dated 16.06.2022, which reads as follows:

¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ: ²æÃ ¤gÀAd£À ¸Áé«Ä (C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ) ¥Á°mÉQßPï, ¸ÀÄAPÀzÀPÀmÉÖ F ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀİè, 37,400-67,000 ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂAiÀİè J f ¦ 9000/- £ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ®Ä CºÀðvÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ ¹§âA¢AiÀÄ «ªÀgÀ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PÀæ. ¹§âA¢AiÀÄ ¸ÉêÉUÉ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À DgÀÄ ªÁgÀUÀ¼À 37,400-67,000zÀ ¸ÀA ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ ¸ÉÃjzÀ ºÀÄzÉÝAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ±ÉæÃtÂUÉ CºÀðvÉ ±ÉæÃtÂAiÀİè CMÁàªÀ¢ü J f ¦ 9000 ªÉÃvÀ£À ¢£ÁAPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ªÉÃvÀ£Á ºÉÆA¢zÀ ªÀÄÆgÀÄ ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À vÀgÀ¨ÉÃw ±ÉæÃtÂUÉ CºÀðvÉ ºÉÆA¢zÀ C£ÀÄzÁ£ÀPÉÌ ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÉÃªÉ ºÉÆA¢zÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÃvÀ£À M¼À¥Àr¹zÀ DzÉñÀ ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃt ¥ÀÆtðUÉÆAqÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ ±ÉæÃt ¸ÀASÉå ¢£ÁAPÀ 1 ²æÃ ºÉZï. Dgï. 27.12.1991 Er188n¦E2009 ¢ 17.07.2010 16.07.2013 29.12.2012 gÀÆ.37,400+9000/-
          dUÀ¢Ã±ï                         15.10.2009           gÀÆ12,000/-                                                   Jf¦
          DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃt                                      (12,000-420-                                             (37,400-67,000)
       G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄ                                              18,300)                                               ¢: 17.07.2013
       ¹«Mï «¨sÁUÀ

2      ²æÃ ¢£ÀPÀgÀ ¦.     03.09.1991   Er188n¦E2009           ¢ 17.07.2010        16.07.2013        05.07.2013      gÀÆ.37,400+9000/-
         DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃt                   15.10.2009            gÀÆ12,000/-                                                   Jf¦
       G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄ                                         (12,000-420-                                             (37,400-67,000)
       DmÉÆÃªÉÆ¨ÉåMï                                              18,300)                                               ¢: 17.07.2013
           «¨sÁUÀ

3       EAzÀĪÀÄw         01.08.1987   n¦E2009Er188           ¢ 28.03.2011       25.03.2014         21.02.2014           gÀÆ.37,400+
        DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃt                    15.10.2009           gÀÆ.12,000-                                             gÀÆ.9000/- Jf¦
       G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄ                                          420-18,300                                             (37,400-67,000)
        E ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¹                                                                                                 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 25.03.2014
         «¨sÁUÀ

4       ²æÃ GªÉÄÃ±ï       01.08.1988   Er188n¦E2009           ¢ 29.01.2012        28.01.2015        27.09.2013      gÀÆ.37,400+9000/-
        ZÀAzÀæ J.¦.                      15.10.2009            gÀÆ12,000/-                                                  Jf¦
         DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃt                                       (12,000-420-                                             (37,400-67,000)
       G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄ                                              18,300)                                               ¢: 29.01.2015
       «eÁÕ£À «¨sÁUÀ
                                 5


4. It is submitted that all these petitioners are eligible for Pay Band IV Payscale by virtue of clarification of All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) dated

04.01.2016. Sl. No.38 of the said clarification reads as follows:

Sl.         Issue                  Clarification
No.

38. Consideration to relax Relaxation in API score is API score applicable for the period of 3 (Degree/Diploma) years only (till date between 5th March 7.11.2015) from the issue of 2010 and issue of AICTE Regulations 2012 in AICTE Regulations 2012 Official Gazette, Thereafter, on 8th November, API score shall be 2012. implemented.

5. Accordingly, it is submitted that there was relaxation in API score for the period of 3 years till 7.11.2015.

6. In light of the details furnished in the memo, it is clear that the case of petitioners fall within the cut off date of 07.11.2015. Taking note of the law laid down in W.P.No.8484/2020 passed on 06.12.2021 and noticing that 6 the eligibility of Pay Band IV Payscale vis-à-vis API Score stands relaxed till 07.11.2015 in terms of AICTE Clarification and accordingly, the State to consider the case of petitioners in terms of the recommendation at Annexure-J and the Annexure produced by the petitioner, reproduced above.

7. In light of the discussion made and keeping in mind the directions of the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.8484/2020, case of petitioners to be considered within a period not later than eight weeks from today.

8. Petition is accordingly disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE VP