IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017 B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.6729/2010 (S-REG) BETWEEN:
MUNIYAPPA S.V., S/O. LATE S.VENKATESHAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION CLERK KARNATAKA SLUM CLEARANCE BOARD SHESHAPURAM, RISHLDAR STREET BANGALORE – 560 020.
(BY SRI S.NARAYANA, ADV.) AND:
KARNATAKA SLUM CLEARANCE BOARD REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON SHESHAPURAM, RISHLDAR STREET BANGALORE – 560 020.
(BY SRI N.MANOHAR, ADV.) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.06.2009, VIDE ANNEXURE-O AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO GRANT ARREARS OF SALARY FORM 02.04.1988 TO 30.07.1989 & FROM 01.08.1989 TO 30.09.2000 IN THE REVISED PAY SCALE WITH ALLOWANCES, WITH INTEREST AND ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner along with another person had filed W.P.Nos.9548 & 9549/1988 and the same were disposed of on 23.09.1994. The orders of termination were quashed and direction with regard to payment of benefits was issued. W.A.Nos.2351-2352/1994 filed by the respondent was dismissed with clarification vide judgment dated 14.12.1994. An official memorandum dated 06.01.1995 was issued regulating the services of the petitioner and another. Another official memorandum having been issued on 09.08.1989 vide Annexure-D, W.P.Nos.64 & 334/1998 was filed asking for a mandamus against the respondent to regularize the service of the petitioners in the cadre of Literate Assistant (SSLC). By an order dated 11.01.2000, petitions were disposed of and the respondents were directed to consider the representation said to have been submitted by the petitioners and pass orders within six months period. An official memorandum dated 24.10.2000 having been issued, a representation dated 09.06.2000 was submitted. Another representation dated 31.07.2001 was submitted to release the arrears. Further representations were made and ultimately an endorsement dated 29.06.2009 having been issued, stating that there is no justification to consider the claim of the petitioner in the matter of release and payment of arrears, this writ petition was filed to quash the endorsement, as at Annexure-O.
2. Heard the learned advocates on both sides and perused the record.
3. Annexure-O, impugned in this petition shows that the issue was referred to panel advocate for furnishing of opinion and an opinion having been received, the petitioner was notified that in view of the legal opinion furnished, there is no scope for consideration of his claim. It is evident from the impugned endorsement that the respondent has failed to consider the claim of the petitioner independently but has simply gone by the legal opinion received, copy of which was also not furnished to the petitioner. Arbitrariness on the part of the respondent, in the matter of consideration of representations dated 24.06.2008, 16.01.2009 and 23.06.2009 of the petitioner is apparent and the decision arrived at therein is vitiated.
In the result, writ petition is allowed and the impugned endorsement quashed. Respondent is directed to consider afresh the aforesaid representations of the petitioner, keeping in view the orders passed vide Annexure-A, as modified by Annexure – B and also Annexure-E. The outcome of consideration shall be made known to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order becomes available.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE ca