IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.16799/2016 (S RES) BETWEEN SRI G S NAGARJUNA AGED 35 YEARS R/AT NO.83, VOMMASANDRA VILLAGE, H.GOLLAHALLI POST, MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101.
(BY SRI UDAYA PRAKASH M, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPT. OF PRIMARY & HIGHER PRIMARY EDUCATION, MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS KOLAR KOLAR DISTRICT-563101 3. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101.
4. THE CITIZEN HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL (AIDED) ... PETITIONER TAYALUR, MULABAGAL TLAUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563101 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T.S.MAHANTHESH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3, SRI V R SARATHY, ADV. FOR R4.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE SALARY PERTAINING TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 26.06.2014 TILL DATE AND FURTHER AS PER THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN AT ANNEX-F, G & H.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent-Aided School.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that since 26.06.2014 till date he has not been paid any salary and has sought for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period commencing from 26.06.2014 till date.
3. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate would submit that the salary in respect of the petitioner has not been released as he has not submitted the records. Learned counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that the petitioner worked between 26.06.2014 till 28.11.2015 and thereafter he has remained absent and in respect of the above said period, they have no objection for release of the salary in favour of the petitioner i.e. between 26.06.2014 to 28.11.2015.
4. The second respondent DDPI is before the court. The learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on instructions would categorically assert that the service records of the petitioner have not been received and particulars of service and other particulars having not been received, the hands of the State are tied down and hence they have not been able to act further.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that he has placed all records before this court. The placing of records before this court would not sub-serve the cause of the petitioner as he is required to place it before the competent authority who in turn has to look into the same and authenticate the same and only thereafter it would be possible for the competent authority to approve the release of salary in favour of the petitioner.
6. Hence, the petition is disposed off by directing the petitioner to make a representation to the fourth respondent with a copy to the second respondent within two weeks from today and shall enclose all such particulars as required for the said purposes with a view to enable the fourth respondent to forward the same along with its recommendation for release of salary between the period 26.06.2014 and 28.11.2015, being undisputed period. If such representation is received within two weeks from today, the fourth respondent shall process and forward the same within two weeks, thereafter on receipt of the recommendation from the fourth respondent, the second respondent shall thereafter process the same within an outer limit of four weeks and pass necessary orders.
Writ petition stands disposed off with the above observations.
It is made clear that if the petitioner is of the opinion that he is entitled for the salary for the period subsequent to 29.11.2015 onwards, it is open for the petitioner to agitate his rights in accordance with law.
The writ petition stands ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
Chs* CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE