IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.10240/2019(S-KAT) BETWEEN:
SIR V SHAILENDRA S/O SRI VEERANNA AGED 44 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS AUDITOR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT DEPARTMENT O/O ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COOP. AUDIT CHAMARAJANAGAR SUB DIVISION CHAMARAJANAGAR R/O CHANDAKAWADI VILLAGE & POST, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.
(BY SRI .A.NAGARAJAPPA A., ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT ... PETITIONER M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 2. THE DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT NO.17, JAYA NIVAS SHANKARMUTT ROAD BASAVANAGUDI,BENGALURU-560004 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CO-OPERATIVE AUDIT CHAMARAJANAGAR SUB DIVISION CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313 (BY SRI.I.TARANATH POOJARY, AGA.) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.6844/2010 DATED 09.11.2018 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-C UPHOLDING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 4.2.2010, MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A23 OF ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE R-3 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NARENDRA PRASAD J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Though this appeal is posted for preliminary hearing, with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, it is heard finally.
2. The petitioner has assailed the legality and correctness of order dated 9.11.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal” for the sake of convenience) in Application No.6844/2010, whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.
3. Brief facts of the case:
Petitioner initially joined the Department of Police as a Typist and worked from 10.1.2000 to 26.10.2005. Subsequently, he was appointed as an Accountant in Municipal Administration Department and worked from 27.10.2005 to 27.3.2008. Later on, he was appointed as an Auditor of Co-operative Societies from 28.3.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a representation dated 12.8.2009 to respondent No.2 seeking to consider his past services rendered in Department of Police and in the Department of Municipal Administration as service in Government of Karnataka for the purpose of pension and other benefits. By endorsement dated 4.2.2010, respondent No.3 has rejected his request. Being aggrieved, he approached the Tribunal by filing Application No.6844/2010. The Tribunal by order dated 9.11.2018 has dismissed his application. Being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the material on record.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to petitioner joining the service as an Auditor of the Co-operative Societies, he had taken permission from the State Government and hence, he is entitled for consideration of his past services for the purpose of pension and other benefits under Rule 224-B of KCSR. But, the Tribunal without considering this aspect of the matter has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that in view of New Pension Scheme coming into force with effect from 1.4.2006, the petitioner is not entitled for considering his past service for the purpose of pension.
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submits that New Pension Scheme has come into force with effect from 1.4.2006. After resigning from his previous service, petitioner has been appointed as an Auditor of Co-operative Societies from 28.3.2008. Therefore, he is not entitled for consideration of his past service for the benefit of pension. He submits that there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly prays for dismissing the writ petition.
7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Typist in the Police Department and worked from 10.1.2000 to 26.10.2005 and subsequently he was appointed as an Accountant in the Municipal Administration Department and worked from 27.10.2005 to 27.3.2008. Later on, he resigned from the previous service as an Accountant and thereafter, he was appointed as an Auditor of Co-operative Societies from 28.3.2008. When he joined the service as an Auditor of Cooperative Societies from 28.3.2008, New pension Scheme had already come into effect and he is covered under the said scheme. There is no provision under the New Pension Scheme to consider petitioner’s past services rendered in the Department of Police and in the Municipal Administration Department for the purpose of pension and other benefits.
8. The State of Karnataka having brought into force the New Pension Scheme w.e.f. from 1.4.2006, the candidates who have been appointed after 1.4.2006 shall come under the purview of contributory pension scheme. Under this scheme, there is no provision to consider the past service of the employees for the purpose of pension and other benefits under Rule 224-B of KCSR. Hence, the Tribunal is justified in rejecting the application.
9. In the circumstances, we do no find any error or infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE DM/-
Sd/- JUDGE