IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION Nos. 11998-12002 OF 2016 (S-R) BETWEEN:
1. SRI KOTRESHI M S/O SRI GUDIMUNDALA MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT RAJANAHALLI POST A K COLONY RAJANAHALLI-577 601 HARIHARA TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 2. SRI VASANTHA D S S/O SEETHARAMA SETTY D V AGED 50 YEARS RESIDING AT #249, 5TH MAIN SAMPIGE LAYOUT PATLEGARAPALYA BANGALORE-560 079 3. SRI J NIRMALA W/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS #17, 4TH B CROSS NEAR R R S L AMRUTHAHALLI SAHAKARNAGAR BANGALORE-560 092 4. SMT. SANGEETHA. BALIKAI (MASUR) W/O. SURENDRA MASUR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, C/O. R.D. DIXITA, DATTATRAYA NILAYA, DOOR NO. 269, BHOOPASANDRA MAIN ROAD, NAGASHETTI HALLI, BANGALORE-560 094.
5. SMT. SRIDEVI N W/O. K.J. RANGANATHA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, C/O. MUNIRAJU, #208, DR. RAJ GOPAL MAIN ROAD, OPP: MILLENNIUM PUBLIC SCHOOL, NAGASHETTIHALLI-560 094.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LAKSHMINARYANA, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT. ANUSHA L & SRI. ASHWIN KUMAR, ADVOCATES) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION, 6TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS NEW PUBLIC OFFICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PUBLIC EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 092.
4. BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER NORTH DIVISION-2, 18TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560 003.
5. SHREE VINAYAKA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY, R.M.S. COLONY, NAGASHETTYHALLI, SANJAYANAGARA, BANGALORE-560 094.
6. SHREE MANJUNATHA KANNADA MEDIUM HIGH SCHOOL, HEAD MASTER, R.M.V. 2ND STAGE, NAGASHETTYHALLI, BANGALORE-560 094.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R1 TO 4; SRI. M P SRIKANTH, ADVOCATE FRO R5 & 6) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE SALARY TO THE PETITIONERS BASED ON GRANT IN AID ORDER DATED 09.07.2013 ANNX-A AND ABOVE UPON COMPLETION OF SEVEN (7) YEARS OF SERVICE BY EACH OF THE PETITIONERS AS PER LAW AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER The petitioners who claim to be the teachers in the respondent-institution that was admitted through Grant- in-Aid dated 09.07.2013 are before this Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus to the official respondents to release their salary acting upon the grant order at Annexure-A. They have also sought for a writ of mandamus to the official respondents to consider their case for shifting of the posts admitted to the grant from the respondent- institution to any other recognized aided institution or Government institution, presumably because grant in aid was withdrawn.
2. After service of notice, the official respondents have entered appearance through the learned Additional Government Advocate, Smt. Proamodhini Kishan and the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have entered appearance through their Panel Counsel, Shri M.P.Shrikant; both the learned Government Advocate and the Panel Counsel together submit that much of the substratum of the writ petitions was the subject matter of W.P.Nos.31411/2018 (EDN-RES c/w 26082/2018 (EDN-GIA) that have been disposed off vide judgment dated 09.11.2018 and therefore, the only relief that can be granted to the petitioners is to direct the respondent-Government to consider their claim for release of the salary and also for continuance of their service in the sixth respondent – institution or to shift their services to any other Recognized Aided Institutions in accordance with law.
3. The respondent-institution was admitted to grant vide order dated 09.07.2013 and the said Grant was withdrawn vide order dated 04.01.2016. This withdrawal was quashed by this Court in W.P.No.63517/2016 (EDN- RES) disposed off on 05.04.2017 and the matter was remanded for consideration afresh. Thereafter again the withdrawal was reiterated by the order dated 13.04.2018 that has been now quashed by this Court in W.P. No.27606/2018 vide judgment dated 04.01.2019.
4. The learned Senior Counsel, Sri. V. Lakshmi Narayana submits and this Court thinks rightly that before issuing the order withdrawing the Grant-in-Aid, the petitioners ought to have been heard inasmuch as the Grant was not only specific to the posts in question but to the incumbents also. Anyway, this question now pales into insignificance inasmuch as the impugned order withdrawing the Grant-in-Aid is set at naught in the cognate writ petition.
5. In view of the above, these writ petitions succeed in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the claim of the petitioners for release of the salary and also for shifting their services to any other aided or recognized or Government institutions as the case may be after holding the necessary enquiry involving all the stake-holders..
6. It is open to the petitioners to make a fresh, comprehensive representation furnishing all material particulars and the supportive documents if any, so that the enquiry contemplated would be meaningful and its conclusion would be expeditious, giving an opportunity of participation to all the stake holders including the Management.
Sd/- JUDGE Bsv