IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.55159 OF 2013 (S-PRO) BETWEEN:
SRI. G.N.LAKSHMIPATHY NAICKER, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O SRI. NARASIMHA NAICKER, RETIRED ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (F & C) (I.R.O.), BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, R/A NO.58, ITTAMADU, B.D.A. LAYOUT, 2ND MAIN, KEB ROAD, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE, 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 085.
... PETITIONER BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR.P, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R.NAVEEN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . THE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION & H.R.D.) KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU – 560 009.
2 . THE MANAGER, ESTABLISHMENT – 2, CORPORATE OFFICE, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009.
3 . THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ADDITIONAL NORTH DIVISION, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, PEENYA DIVISION, 3RD STAGE, NEAR UCO BANK, PEENYA BENGALURU - 560 058.
4 . THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU – 560 001.
5 . THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELECTRICITY), BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN AREA ZONE, 3RD FLOOR, MAHARUSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPODNENTS TO FIX THE PAY OF THE PETITIONER IN THE PROMOTIONAL POST OF ACCOUNTS OFFICER WITH EFFECT FROM 11.02.2006 BY GRANTING HIM PROMOTIONAL INCREMENT OF RS.495/- RAISING HIS PAY TO RS.17,500/- IN GRADE RS.9,470-20470 UNDER REGULATION 36.C(1) OF KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD EMPLOYEES SERVICE FROM 12.1.2012 TILL HIS DATE OF RETIREMENT ON 30.09.2006 & FURTHER REVISE HIS PENSIONARY BENEFITS BASED ON THE LAST PAY OF RS.17,500/- AND PAID THE ARREARS OF PENSION FORM 1.1.2006 TILL DATE; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner an employee of the respondent-KPTCL is against non-sanction of increment on account of his promotion on 03.02.2006 from the post of Assistant Accounts Officer to that of Accounts Officer, in terms of Regulation 36.C(1) of Karnataka Electricity Board Employees Service Regulations. After service of notice, the respondents having entered appearance through their Panel Counsel oppose the writ petition.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, a short question that arises for consideration is whether an employee earning promotion is entitled to grant of an increment in terms of Regulation 36.C(1) regardless of his earning annual increment, during the same year. This question need not detain the court any longer since answer is provided by the said Regulation itself which reads as under:
“36.C.(1). Not withstanding anything contained in these Regulations, when an employee is promoted to a post or appointed to an ex-cadre post and such promotion or appointment involves the assumption of duties and responsibilities of grater importance than those of the post held by him, his initial pay in the time scale of the higher post shall be fixed at the stage next above the pay in the time-scale of the lower post at the time of such fixation.”
[Proviso is not reproduced since the same is not relevant for consideration].
3. The text & context of the subject Regulation leave no manner of doubt as to entitlement of the employee to the grant of one increment on the event of promotion itself regardless of his earning or not earning other usual increments. An argument to the contrary cannot be sustained without straining the language of the above Regulation. This having been misconstrued by the respondent-Management, the impugned endorsement is unsustainable.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; the impugned endorsement is set at naught; it is declared that petitioner is entitled for the grant of one increment by virtue of his promotion dated 03.02.2006 in terms of regulation 36.C(1), which may be nomenclatured as promotion increment.
A Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondents to take further steps for granting to the petitioner the said increment and other consequential benefits thereof within a period of three months; failing which the respondent shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- to him.
Sd/- JUDGE DS