IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION Nos.6380-6404/2017 (S-RES) BETWEEN 1. SHRI S B DESAI AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: SDA, 2. SHRI B G NELLAGIKAR AGE 49 YEARS, OCC: TYPIST, 3. SHRI R P BIRADAR AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: LIBRARY ASSISTANT 4. SHRI. S S KAKKASAGERI AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: PEON 5. SHRI. B S BIRADAR AGE 51 YEARS, OCC: PEON 6. SHRI. M S ARJUNAGI AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: PEON 7. SHRI. B G CHALLAGI AGE 54 YEARS, OCC: PEON 8. SHRI. S B CHIMMALAGI AGE 49 YEARS, OCC: PEON 9. SHRI. M N PUJARI AGE 54 YEARS, OCC: LIBRARY ATTENDER 10. DR. A B SINDAGI AGE 54 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 11. PROF. B A PATIL AGE 60 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 12. DR. J G JOSHI AGE 56 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 13. PROF. M G BIRADAR AGE 55 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 14. PROF. M S HOSAMANI AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 15. PROF. R N SHERIKAR AGE 54 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 16. PROF. B G MATH AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 17. PROF. V G INAMADAR AGE 57 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 18. DR. A M MANAGULI AGE 53 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 19. DR. B G PATIL AGE 49 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 20. PROF. S A KERUTAGI AGE 50 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 21. PROF. S M BIRADAR AGE 51 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 22. PROF. B N PATIL AGE 56 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, 23. SHRI. S M KUMBAR AGE 56 YEARS, OCC: LIBRARIAN 24. SMT. S S BIRADAR AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: F.D.C.
25. SHRI. S M LOKAPURA AGE 49 YEARS, OCC: LECTURER, ALL ARE WORKING AT C M MANAGUI ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE, SINDAGI, SINDAGI TALUK, BIJAPUR DISTRICT-586128 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V. MUNIRAJU V-ADV) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M S BUIDLING, BENGLAURU-560001 3. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, TECHNICAL BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 4. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 5. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARATMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KALBURAGI-585101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.S. INDIRESH-AGA) * * * THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO STRUCK DOWN THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT NO.07 OF "KARNATAKA PRIVATE AIDED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS EMPLOYEES (REGULATION OF PAY, PENSION AND OTHER BENEFITS) ACT, 2014" AND CONSEQUENTLY TO QUASH THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 12.02.2014 PUBLISHED IN KARNATAKA GAZETTE DATED 12.02.2014 IN PART IV (a) BY THE RESPONDENT-1 AT ANNEXURE-B.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ‘PRELIMINARY HEARING’ THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned Addl. Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government Advocate.
3. The petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:-
“(a) Struck down the provisions of the Act No.07 of “Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulation of Pay, Pension and other Benefits) Act, 2014” and consequently to quash the Gazette Notification dated 12.02.2014 published in Karnataka Gazette in No.SAMVYASHAE 60 SHASANA 2013, BANGALORE dated 12.02.2014 in Part IV (a) by the Respondent No.1 as per ANNEXURE – ‘B’.
(b) Issue Writ of Mandamus or any other Order of Directions, directing the Respondents to refix the Pay scale of the Petitioners and to pay the appropriate salary in favour of them which was existing & paid prior to enactment of the impugned Act and to forthwith refund the amount which has been recovered from the salary of the Petitioners pursuant to the impugned Act.”
4. The learned Addl. Government Advocate would submit that the reliefs sought for in the writ petition is infructuous on account of the fact that the provisions of the Act has already been struck down by this court in W.P. Nos.112957-113040/2014 and W.P. Nos.113041-
113050/2014 whereby this Court has passed the following:-
“(i) “A writ of Mandamus is issued to the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 to pay arrears of salary and other emoluments as per revised pay scale to which the petitioners would be entitled to for the period 01.01.2006 to 23.12.2009 within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on failure to make such payment petitioners would be entitled to interest @ 8% p.a.
(ii) It is needless to state that on the request made by the State Government after payment for releasing 80% of the contribution payable by the Central Government and on such request being received within three months thereof, the Central Government shall release the said amount as per the provisions of the scheme.”
5. Further, this court by its order in W.P. No.21216/2014 and connected petitions was also pleased to strike down the said provision and in that view extended the benefits to the petitioners therein. The same was taken note of and followed by this court in W.P. No.108588-108604/2015 dated 09.09.2015 wherein this court has passed the following:-
“i) The writ petitions are allowed.
(ii) Respondent State shall continue to pay salary or pension as the case may be, to petitioners and similarly placed persons as was being paid pursuant to its earlier orders or in other words, as it was being paid prior to impugned enactment.
OR The respondent-State shall comply with the directions already issued by this Court extending the monetary benefits and treating the petitioners working in Private Aided Educational Institutions on par with the employees working in Government Institutions.
(iii) In the event of respondent-State having recovered any amount/s pursuant to the impugned enactment, same is hereby ordered to be refunded to the respective petitioner/s by the State expeditiously, at any rate within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(iv) The respondent-State is directed to implement the order passed by this Court in the writ petitions cited supra and in these writ petitions, as expeditiously as possible.”
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that despite the request, the respondent authority had failed to refund the same as ordered by this court. It is not in dispute that the said provision has been struck down and the same has been confirmed by the appellate court and the said order was appealed in the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court has also confirmed the same. The said law laid down by this court having become final, it was incumbent upon the respondents to act in compliance with the directions of this Court. Hence in view of the above, the petitioners herein would be entitled to the similar benefits of the directions issued by this court herein supra noted. It is open for the petitioners to submit a representation to the concerned authority/respondent No.3 who shall examine the same and dispose of the same in the light of the observations made by this court in W.P. Nos.108588-108604 dated 09.09.2015 and W.P. Nos.112957-113040/14 and W.P. No.21216/2004 and extend the benefit to the petitioners if they are similarly situated.
These Writ Petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS-CT Ksm*/Chs