Karnataka High Court
Sri T Lakshminarayana vs The Additional Chief Secretary on 17 December, 2024
Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:52161
WP No. 16542 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 16542 OF 2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. T. LAKSHMINARAYANA,
S/O LATE THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT NO.2, SIDDAPPAJIGUDI,
MYSURU - 570 024.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MUDDARANGAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally
signed by 2. THE DIRECTOR,
MAMATHA R DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
Location: VISVESHWARAIAH TOWER,
High Court of
Karnataka 9TH FLOOR, B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER,
CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
NEW SAYYAJIRAO ROAD,
MYSURU - 570 024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. GAURAV G.K, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:52161
WP No. 16542 of 2022
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE
28952/DMA/224/CEST/2019-20 DATED 07.06.2022 AS
ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the impugned endorsement dated 07.06.2022 at Annexure-'A', whereby the Director of Municipal Administration has rejected the request of the petitioner for promotion from the post of Tracer to the post of Draughtsman on the ground that for the purpose of promotion the petitioner does not possess a degree in Diploma (Civil).
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined office as Gangman of the 3rd respondent on 21.04.1984 and was promoted as Attender on 12.09.1991. It is further submitted that he was promoted as Tracer on 28.05.2005 and on completion of five years, had submitted a -3- NC: 2024:KHC:52161 WP No. 16542 of 2022 representation for seeking promotion as Draughtsman on 02.09.2010. It is the case of the petitioner that the department was reorganized and fresh service conditions came into force by virtue of rules framed by the Government on 11.04.2011 namely Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Common Recruitment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2011.
3. It is submitted that no doubt in light of the reorganization, question of promotion from the post of Tracer is not provided for. But however, if under the rules in existence as on date when petitioner became eligible for promotion under the old rules, his case was to be considered. There would be benefits accruing if the petitioner was to be promoted under the old rules, namely Karnataka Public Works (Irrigation Services) (Recruitment) Rules, 1983.
4. It is contended that in terms of the then existing rules, the promotion to the post of Draughtsman at Sl.No.31 of the Rules indicate that the employee must -4- NC: 2024:KHC:52161 WP No. 16542 of 2022 have put in service of not less than five years in the cadre of Tracer, with the further proviso that if the officers having put in service of five years are not available, case of those who have put in three years of service may be considered.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's entitlement under the old rules would require considering his promotion under the old rules prior to the 2011 rules coming into force. Further, it is submitted that under the old rules if the petitioner was eligible and his right were to be considered, the petitioner would have been promoted to the post of Draughtsman and subsequent benefits would have to be extended to the petitioner, since as on 2011 petitioner would then have been holding the post of Draughtsman and consequences of new rules coming into force would then have to be looked into.
6. It is to be noticed that in an earlier occasion, petitioner had approached this court in WP.No.3918/2022 -5- NC: 2024:KHC:52161 WP No. 16542 of 2022 which was disposed off in terms of the observations made at para 2 which reads as follows:
"2. Consequently, this writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.2 - Director of Municipal Administration to consider the recommendation made by the Commissioner of City Municipal Corporation, Mysuru, for granting promotion to the petitioner from the post of Tracer to Junior Engineer, for the reasons stated in the recommendation, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order."
7. In terms of the order passed in WP.No.3918/2022, the Director of Municipal Administration was directed to consider recommendation made by the Commissioner of City Municipal Corporation, Mysuru, for granting promotion from the post of Tracer within a period of two months.
8. Perused the endorsement dated 07.06.2022. The endorsement is to the effect that petitioner's -6- NC: 2024:KHC:52161 WP No. 16542 of 2022 promotion to Junior Engineer cannot be considered in light of the Municipal Corporation Rules of 2011.
9. The endorsement further stipulates that under the new rules, unless the petitioner possesses technical qualification of Diploma (Civil), question of considering his promotion from the post of Tracer to Junior Engineer does not arise.
10. It must be noticed that the endorsement is on a wrong assumption of petitioner claiming promotion under the new rules. It is a case of the petitioner that under the rules existing before the Municipal Corporation Rules, 2011, petitioner was entitled for promotion from the post of Tracer to Draughtsman, if he had completed five years of service as a Tracer.
11. Accordingly, as the petitioner had been promoted as Tracer on 28.05.2005 and had completed five years as on 2010, the petitioner's case is that his right for promotion ought to have been considered as on 2010 on -7- NC: 2024:KHC:52161 WP No. 16542 of 2022 completion of 5 years even prior to the new Municipal Corporation Rules coming into force in 2011.
12. In light of such stand, the endorsement at Annexure-'A' is set aside. The respondent - State is to consider on the basis of the recommendation made, entitlement of the petitioner as on 2010 under the old rules for promotion as is permissible under law. Such decision to be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.
Accordingly, petition is disposed off. All contentions are kept open.
Sd/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR