IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.57883/2018(S-RES) BETWEEN SMT. JAYAVANI G B W/O LATE H L KESHAVAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS PRESENTLY RESIDING AT G.B.HOUSING BOARD APARTMENT OPP. FIRE ENGINE STATION MANDYA CMD MANDYA - 571 401.
(BY SRI PADMANABHA R, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION M.S.BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION PALACE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL IN KARNATAKA (ENTITLEMENT & ACCOUNTS) PARK HOUSE, BENGALURU - 560 001 BENGALURU CITY - 560 001. (BY SMT M S PRATHIMA, AGA) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE COMMUNICATION LETTER BEARING 153269/RRR IN CASE NO. PV12/R-13497 DATED 07.04.1998 OF THE R-3 ADDRESSED TO THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AS INOPERATIVE, UNENFORCEABLE, VOID AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH ANNEXURE-C.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the communication dated 07.04.1998 at Annexure-C to the writ petition. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to reckon and count the service rendered by the petitioner’s husband from the date of entry into service i.e., 07.08.1968 and provide the difference in the terminal benefits by taking into account the date of entry into service.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that her husband was appointed as Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering on 07.08.1968 by the Management of Peoples Education Trust (R), Mandya, Mandya District. Thereafter, the appointment of the petitioner’s husband was admitted to the Grant-in-Aid, as per the memo dated 31.03.1993. The petitioner’s husband retired from service on 31.12.1997. The petitioner being aggrieved by the finalization of the revised pension claim, which is dated 07.04.1998, is before this Court, assailing the same, since the revised pension is fixed reckoning the date of admission to salary grant and not date of entry into service.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the very same question fell for consideration before this Court in several other writ petitions, including W.P.No.28122/2015, which was disposed of on 04.06.2018, where the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2467/2015 and connected appeals, was also taken into consideration.
5. However, having taken note that the writ appeals are pending and in the said writ appeals an interim order dated 27.11.2015 has been passed wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench had ordered that insofar as the superannuated employees, the pensionary benefits be paid taking into consideration the date of their initial appointment. This Court had held that the same is necessary to be paid to the petitioner as well. However, it was further held that the ultimate result would depend on the consideration to be made by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the said writ appeals.
6. In that view of the matter, a direction is hereby issued to the respondents to settle, disburse and pay the pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner taking into account the date of entry into service of the petitioner’s husband as 07.08.1968. However, if any general order is made by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the said writ appeals, at that stage, appropriate application of the same be made to the case of the petitioner as well and if on the other hand, if any contentions to assail the same arise at that stage, for the petitioner, the same is also kept open.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file her Memo of Appearance within a period of two weeks from today.
SD/- JUDGE DL