WP/35216/2025 of SRI A L RAMAKRISHNA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 30 September 2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 3.

HC-KAR

2. The petitioner, who is working under respondent No.4- Institution, has filed the present petition seeking for quashing of the Act No.7/2014, Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulation of Pay, Pension and other Benefits) Act, 2014 at Annexure-C. The petitioner also sought for extension of benefits as observed and to grant benefits in terms of the observations made in W.P.No.21216/2014 as well as observations made in W.A.No.2476/2015 and connected matters. In terms of the representation at Annexure-C, the petitioner has asserted that he is entitled for certain benefits and observations made in W.A.No.2467/2015 and connected matters.

3. At the time of consideration of the matter, reliance is placed on the order passed in W.A.No.2476/2015 and connected matters dated 24.07.2026.

HC-KAR

4. A perusal of the said order would reveal that writ petitions assailing the constitutional validity of the Act in question was allowed and W.P.No.21216/2014 and connected matters came to be allowed. The same was challenged in W.A.No.2476/2015 and connected matters.

5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submits that while the order in writ petition was affirmed, however the nature of relief that flows to the petitioners is on the basis of the observations made in para 61 of the order in appeal. Taking note of the same and on perusal of para 61, the present petition could be disposed of.

6. Para 61 of the judgment reads as follows: "61. It is also necessary to clarify the extent of the relief that would flow from the present judgment. The issue involved in the present batch of matters is confined to whether the service rendered by employees during the non-grant period is liable to be reckoned for the purpose of fixation of pay and other consequential service

HC-KAR

benefits. Neither the provisions governing grant- in-aid nor the statutory framework casts any liability upon the State to pay salary for the period prior to admission of the post to grant-in- aid. As produced supra, Annexure-I of Rules, 1999 would make it abundantly clear that the management shall be liable for payment of salary and other benefits till the date such posts are admitted into grant-in-aid. The liability to pay salary during the non-grant period continues to rest upon the management of the concerned institution. Consequently, the service rendered during the said period shall be taken into account only for the purpose of notional fixation of pay as on the date of admission of the post to grant-in- aid and for extending consequential benefits such as pension and other service benefits. The employees shall not be entitled to claim arrears of salary or any other monetary benefits from the State for the period preceding the admission of the post to grant-in-aid."

Taking note of the above, entitlement of the petitioners would be as observed by the court in the observations contained in para 61.

HC-KAR

7. Accordingly petition is allowed. Respondents No.1 to 3 are directed to take note of the observations made above and reckon services of the petitioners from the date of appointment i.e. appointment pre grant in aid for the purpose of extending benefits as would flow from para 61 of the order in writ appeal mentioned above.

8. Needless to state, the respondents to complete consideration and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months.

9. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE SKS