AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—The 2nd Respondent is a body constituted under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1976. The 1st Petitioner was appointed by the 2nd Respondent as a driver, on daily wages. The 2nd Petitioner was appointed by the 2nd Respondent as a Second Division Assistant, on daily wages. By an order dated 10.03.1992 of the 2nd Respondent, the Petitioners'' service was regularised with effect from 30.07.1988, with a condition that, they are entitled to monetary benefits only from 01.03.1992.
The 1st Petitioner filed W.P. 17862/05 to direct the Respondents to regularise his service with effect from 01.09.1985 with all consequential benefits or in the alternative, to extend all monetary and other service benefits with effect from 20.07.1988, as per the order of regularisation. The said writ petition was disposed of, permitting the Petitioner to submit an additional representation, upon the receipt of which the Respondents were directed to pass an order in accordance with law.
The 2nd Petitioner filed W.P. 17863/05 to quash an order dated 01.07.2003 passed by the State Government and a consequential order dated 05.09.2003 passed by the 2nd Respondent and to direct the Respondents to continue him in the post on regular basis with all consequential benefits. The said writ petition was allowed in part on 14.06.2007 and the impugned orders were quashed and the Respondents were directed to reconsider the matter in accordance with law, permitting the Petitioner to submit a detailed representation.
The 2nd Respondent forwarded the proposals to the 1st Respondent. The matter having been considered, the 1st Respondent passed an order dated 01.07.2009, granting approval for the regularisation of the service of the Petitioners with effect from 30.07.1988. Thereafter, the 2nd Respondent passed orders dated 27.08.2009 and 31.08.2009, notionally extending the benefit of regularisation of service to the Petitioners, with effect from 30.07.1988. The 2nd Respondent has passed an order on 02.09.2009, extending the benefit of ''time bound advancement'' (Selection Time Scale of Pay) for 10 years of completed service and ''Automatic Promotion to Senior Scale of Pay'' for 15 years of completed service in the same cadre without promotion, by reckoning the date of service of the Petitioners as 01.03.1992.
The grievance which the Petitioners have sought to ventilate in these petitions is that, the 2nd Respondent is not justified in reckoning their service with effect from 01.03.1992 and the same should be with effect from 30.07.1988. These writ petitions have been filed to direct the Respondents to reckon the service of the Petitioners with effect from 30.07.1988 and extend all consequential benefits.
Sri K. Govindaraj, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that, though the services of the Petitioners was regularised w.e.f. 30.07.1988 and the Petitioners having worked on par with regular employees, the exclusion of the Petitioners'' service prior to 1.3.1992 is arbitrary and discriminatory. Learned Counsel submitted that, the 1st Respondent has accorded approval as per an order dated 1.07.2009, for regularisation of the service of the Petitioners w.e.f. 30.7.1988 and hence, the 2nd Respondent is bound to extend the consequential benefits of ''time bound advancement'' (Selection Time Scale of Pay) for 10 years of completed service and ''Automatic Promotion to Senior Scale of Pay'' for 15 years of completed service in the same cadre and not extending of the said benefits by the 2nd Respondent is arbitrary. However, learned Counsel submitted that, the Petitioners give up the claim for difference of arrears of pay and allowances for the service put in between 30.7.1988 up to 28.2.1992.
Sri A.V. Gangadharappa, learned Counsel appearing for 2nd Respondent, on the other hand contended that, the representation submitted by the Petitioners after disposal of W.P. 17862 and 17863/2005 were considered and proposals as per Annexures-G and H were submitted to the Government, which approved the action taken in regularising the service of the Petitioners as per Annexure-A and B extending monetary benefits w.e.f. 1.3.1992 as is clear from Government Orders as at Annexures J and K, based on which, the orders as at Annexures L and M, extending the benefits of the service of the Petitioners w.e.f. 30.7.1988 on notional basis and with all consequential benefits w.e.f. 10.3.1992 was passed and since the Petitioners have not questioned the said orders of the Government or that of the 2nd Respondent, the Petitioners are not entitled to maintain the writ petitions, to extend the consequential benefits of increments etc., from 30.7.1988. Learned Counsel submitted that, the case of the Petitioners was considered in accordance with law and no injustice as such has occasioned to them and the allegation of arbitrariness and discrimination is wholly imaginary.
I have perused the writ petitions papers.
The point for consideration is:
Whether the 2nd Respondent is justified in not extending to the Petitioners, the benefits of increments, on notional basis w.e.f. 30.7.1988?
Undeniably, 2nd Respondent issued memorandums as at Annexures A and B, whereby and whereunder, the Petitioners service in the respective posts held by them, was regularized w.e.f. 30.07.1988. However, the Petitioners were held entitled to monetary benefits from 01.03.1992. W.P. Nos. 17862/2005 and 17863/2005 filed by the Petitioners were disposed off, directing the Respondents to consider the representations of the Petitioners and another, in accordance with law. The 2nd Respondent having received the representations from the Petitioners and to give effect to the orders passed in the said writ petitions, submitted proposals to the 1st Respondent on 22.08.2007 and 31.08.2009 (Annexures G and H) and sought clarification with regard to dates from which the monetary benefits should be extended to the Petitioners.
Considering the said proposals, the Government passed the orders dated 01.07.2009, as at Annexures J and K, according sanction to the decision taken by the 2nd Respondent, to regularise the Petitioners in the vacant posts held by them w.e.f. 30.07.1988. On receipt of the said Government orders, the 2nd Respondent passed the orders dated 27.08.2007 and 31.08.2009, as at Annexures L and M, reckoning the Petitioners service w.e.f. 30.07.1988, but extending monetary benefits from 01.03.1992. It has been made clear therein that, the period between 30.07.1988 till 10.03.1992 was ''notional. However, while extending the benefit of ''time bound advancement'' and ''Automatic promotion to senior scale of pay'', the services rendered by the Petitioners w.e.f. 30.07.1988 has not been taken into consideration and the service for extending the said benefits has been reckoned w.e.f. 01.03.1992 only.
The orders at Annexures N. and P, being against the decisions taken by the Respondents from time to time, noticed supra, in the matter of regularization of service of the Petitioners and extending the benefits, the Petitioners are justified in filing these petitions, to direct the Respondents to reckon their service w.e.f. 30.07.1988. The orders of the 2nd Respondent as at Annexures N and Q, being arbitrary and against the orders passed by the 1st Respondent on 01.07.2009 i.e., Annexures J and K, has to be quashed. However, the Petitioners are not entitled to monetary benefits for the period between 30.07.1988 till 01.03.1992, as was made clear in the orders of regularization, as at Annexures A and B, which was approved by the 1st Respondent as per Annexures J and K, in terms of which, the orders at Annexures L and M were passed by the 2nd Respondent, which orders have remained unchallenged.
In the result, the writ petitions are allowed and the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent, as at Annexures N and Q are quashed. The 2nd Respondent is directed to reckon the regular service of the Petitioners w.e.f. 30.07.1988 on notional basis and ''extend the monetary benefits w.e.f. 01.03.1992'' and pass fresh order with regard to time bound advancement (selection time scale of pay) for 10 years of completed service and Automatic promotion to senior scale of pay for 15 years of completed service in the same cadre without promotion.
Time for compliance is two months.
No costs.