WP/12288/2023 of THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs SMT K.P.M. SAVITRI DEVI on 22 June 2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioners-State Authorities in Education Department are before this Court questioning the order dated 12.10.2020 in Application Nos.6942-6944/2016 passed by Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereunder the Tribunal has passed the following order: "ORDER

The applications are partly allowed. The respondents are directed to reckon the services of the applicants from the date of initial appointment till the date of regularization for the purpose of fixation of pay, pensionary benefits and release all the consequential benefits including pension, along with interest as per the latest Government Order."

2. Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Sri Harisha A.S. for the petitioners and learned counsel

HC-KAR

Smt.Apoorva Basavaraddar for learned counsel Sri M.K.Prithveesh for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers.

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners would submit that the Tribunal could not have directed the petitioners to count the previous service prior to the respondents' regularization for the purpose of pay fixation and pensionary benefits. He would further submit that the respondents were regularized under Karnataka Part-time Job Oriented Course Employees Absorption Act, 2011 (for short 'Act, 2011') and referring to Section 5 of the said Act, he would submit that the previous service prior to regularization could not be counted for the purpose of pay, seniority, leave or pension. Thus, he would submit that the Tribunal has committed an error in directing the petitioners herein to count past service of the respondents prior to regularization for all financial benefits.

4. Further, learned Additional Government Advocate would point out that the Tribunal in paragraph No.10 placing reliance on B.S. Nakara vs. Union of India reported in

HC-KAR

(1983) 1 SCC 305 discusses about the counting of prior service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and there is no discussion with regard to counting of past service for the purpose of fixation of pay. When the Tribunal has not considered the aspect of counting past service for fixation of pay, the Tribunal could not have while ordering direct the petitioners to count the service prior to regularization for the purpose of fixation of pay. Thus, he prayed for allowing the writ petition.

5. Learned counsel Smt.Apoorva Basavaraddar for respondents would submit that the service rendered by the respondents prior to their regularization shall have to be counted for all financial benefits, since the service rendered by them is regular service. Further it is submitted that there was no interruption and they have continuously discharged the duties till their regularization under the Act, 2011. Therefore, learned counsel for the respondents would support the order passed by the Tribunal and prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

6. However, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are

HC-KAR

of the considered opinion that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in directing the petitioners to count the past service prior to the regularization of the respondents for the purpose of fixation of their pay. However, we make it clear that the respondents would be entitled for counting their past service prior to regularization for the purpose of fixation of pension and pensionary benefits.

7. The Tribunal at paragraph No.10 has recorded its finding as follows: "10. On reading all the judgement, it is crystal clear that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted all the pensionary benefits from the initial dates of appointment to all the employees. The same principle including the fundamental right is discussed in B.S. Nakara’s case. The applicants are entitled for pension and other benefits from the date of initial appointment. The alleged Section of the Act 2011 is not applicable to the case on hand. As rightly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, pension is neither a bounty not a matter of grade depending upon the sweet will of the employee, nor an ex gratia payment. It is a payment for the past services rendered. It is a social welfare measure rendering socio-economic justice to those who in the heyday of their life ceaselessly toiled for the employer on an assurance that in their old age they would not be left in the lurch. Therefore, the annexures issued by the respondents marked as Annexure-A7 to A9 are contrary to law much less violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India ignoring the valuable service rendered by the applicants. Hence, we decline to accept the objections raised by the Government. The applicants partly succeeded in these applications as denial of the service benefits is discrimination. In other words, the

HC-KAR

applicants are entitled for similar benefits as granted by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka on the ground of parity also."

8. On reading of the above reasoning of the Tribunal, it is seen that the Tribunal has discussed only with regard to entitlement of past service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. There is no discussion by the Tribunal with regard to counting of past service for the purpose of fixation of pay. However, the Tribunal has placed reliance on the decision of N.C. Dhingra vs. Union of India and Others reported in (1996) 7 SCC 564 to say that the previous service could be counted for the purpose of fixation of pension and pensionary benefits. We are in agreement with the said finding which is based on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court.

9. In an identical fact situation, this Court in W.P.No.1238/2021 dated 08.06.2026 has permitted the counting of past service prior to regularization for the purpose of fixation of pension and pensionary benefits excluding the counting of service for the purpose of fixation of pay.

10. In the light of the above, the writ petition is allowed-in-part. The impugned order dated 12.10.2020 in

HC-KAR

Application Nos.6942-6944/2016 passed by the Tribunal insofar as direction to count the past service prior to regularization for the purpose of fixation of pay is quashed. It is made clear that the past service prior to regularization of respondents could be counted for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. SD/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14