IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION NO.23215 OF 2017 (S-R) BETWEEN SRI B R MANJUNATH (RTD ASSISTANT) AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O. K B RANGAPPA, R.AT NO. B-6, 1ST FLOOR, BEHIND HOSPITAL, JNANABHARATHI, BANGALORE - 560 056. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI NAGESH S, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE REGISTRAR, BANGALORE UNIVERSITY, JNANABHARATHI, BANGALORE – 560 056.
2. THE FINANCE OFFICER, BANGALORE UNIVERSITY, JNANABHARATHI, BANGALORE - 560 056. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M KESHAVA REDDY, ADV. FOR R1 & R2 (VK NOT FILED), SRI B RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VK FILED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE ARREARS OF SALARY, PENSIONER BENEFITS AND RETIREMENT BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE ANNEXURE-F.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petitioner has sought for the following relief: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ and direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary, pensioner benefits and retirement benefits to the petitioner by considering the Annexure- F.”
2. Petitioner while working with the respondent-University was facing parallel proceedings. In a Disciplinary Proceedings, it was concluded in imposing penalty of dismissal from service, whereas in criminal proceedings he had been acquitted.
3. Grievance of the petitioner is that even though he is dismissed from service, he is entitled for retirement benefits on par with one Sri M.S.Kannan.
4. Question that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitle to retirement benefits in view of his dismissal from services on par with one Sri M.S.Kannan, who had been extended the retirement benefit.
5. It is to be noted that no provision is provided to extend the retirement benefit in respect of the dismissal of employee. Merely one Sri M.S.Kannan had been granted the benefit, in the absence of any statutory provision such benefit cannot be extended to the petitioner. Illegality cannot be perpetuated. Mere acquittal in the criminal case, the petitioner is not entitled to have the benefit as long as dismissal order is not set-aside by the competent authority/forum.
Hence, petitioner has not made out a case.
Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE BSR