- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 27191 OF 2017 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. C. MADAN GOPAL AGED 64 YEARS, S/O LATE CHINNAPPA PILLAI, NO.1084/1, 11TH A CROSS, SWARNANAGAR, ROBERSTONPET, KOLAR GOLD FIELDS-563122 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.B.NARAYANA SWAMY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION., M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, II FLOOR, TECHNICAL EDUCATION BUILDING, OPP/MAHARANI COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. 3. GOLDEN VALLEY EDUCATIONAL TRUST, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT KGF FIRST GRADE COLLEGE CAMPUS, OORAGAUM, KGF KOLAR DISTRICT-563120 Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 4. GOVERNMENT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL, ROBERSTONPET, K.G.F., KOLAR DISTRICT-563120. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. REUBEN JACOB., ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL ALONG WITH SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA FOR R-1, R-2 & R-4; SRI. SURAJ SAMPATH., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE ORDER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E2 AS AFFIRMED BY THE ANNEXURES-F AND F1 AND BY ANNEXURE-F2, AS SOUGHT IN THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01.06.2016 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-M TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. In the year 1979, the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer to KGF First Grade College, being run by respondent No.3—Trust. 2. On 03.10.2001, the petitioner was suspended, but this order of suspension was revoked by the Committee on 18.01.2002 and the petitioner was reinstated on 19.01.2002. However, on 12.11.2003, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 the petitioner was once again suspended by the Management. 3. The Revisional Authority however set aside this order of suspension on 15.11.2006, but the petitioner was not reinstated. The Management proceeded to file a writ petition challenging the order of the Revisional Authority, by which it set aside the order of suspension that had been passed against the petitioner. This writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 14.03.2008 and yet, the petitioner was not re-instated. 4. The Management being aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition filed a writ appeal and this writ appeal was also dismissed on 15.01.2009. 5. Despite the dismissal of the writ appeal, the petitioner was not reinstated and the Management proceeded to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of a special leave petition, and this SLP was also dismissed on 19.10.2009. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 6. Despite these orders passed by this Court as well as the Apex Court, the Management did not choose to reinstate the petitioner. 7. On 25.01.2011, the Department once again issued a direction to the 3rd respondent to reinstate the petitioner, but that was not complied with. Subsequently, a direction was issued on 25.08.2012 directing the Department to pay arrears of salary and that was also not complied with. 8. Ultimately, on 28.08.2012, the Department, on its own, reinstated the petitioner into a Government College. This reinstatement was made three days prior to his retirement and subsequently on 31.08.2012, as the petitioner attained the age of superannuation, he was permitted to retire. 9. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking for a direction to implement the order passed by the Department which directed his reinstatement on 15.11.2006. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 10. During the pendency of this writ petition, with the active assistance of learned Additional Advocate General Mr.Reuben Jacob as well as the learned counsel for the Management, the dispute as regards the petitioner’s arrears of salary was settled and the institution has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.55 lakhs. In fact, this sum of Rs.55 lakhs was paid by the President of the Institution out of his own funds, since the 3rd respondent did not have the necessary funds. 11. It may be pertinent to state here that a further sum of Rs.7 lakhs which was in the joint account of the Department and the Management was also agreed to be paid to the petitioner and thus, the claim of the petitioner insofar as arrears of salary by paying a sum of Rs.65 lakhs without any interest has been settled. 12. However, thereafter, a dispute has arisen regarding settlement of pension. Obviously, the pension cannot - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 be settled on the basis of sums on which the arrears of salary were settled and the concerned Rule will have to be applied. 13. Rules 18 to 25 of the Karnataka State Aided College and Technical Institutions Employees Triple Benefit Scheme (Pension, Insurance and Management Contribution) Rules define the “qualifying service” in the following terms: “18. In computing the length of qualifying service all previous service whether temporary, officiating or permanent in regular and whole time posts in any State Aided Institution or institutions governed by the Karnataka State Triple Benefit Scheme rules shall be taken into account provided the services of the employees in such Institutions are regulated and recorded in the service Register with the necessary approval of the competent authority and the grant was allowed thereof by the department concerned during the period in respect of Institution. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 19. The service rendered in Karnataka State Government shall count for pension under these rules subject to the condition that the pension or service gratuity, if any, drawn for such service shall be refunded to Government. 20. The services of the part-time employees of Aided Institutions shall not count for pension. 21. Leave is treated as qualifying service to the extent to which would be treated as qualifying service if the service had been governed by the K.C.S.R. 22. The Service rendered by an employee before he has completed 18 years of age or after attaining the age of superannuation prescribed in Rule 17 of these rules shall not qualify for pension or service gratuity or management contribution. 23. War service or military service rendered by an employee shall count as service qualifying for pension to the extent provided for in the K.C.S.R.s. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 24. In respect of retirement or death while in service of the employees of Aided Institution on or after the appointed day but before the 19th September 1974 interruptions in service caused for reasons beyond the control of the employees concerned shall not entail forfeiture of past service. The period/periods of break will however not count. 25. Unauthorised absence from duty other than unauthorised absence of the kind referred to in Rule No. 106-A and 162 of the KCSRs. constitutes interruption of service entailing forfeiture of past service; other interruptions in the service of the employee shall not entail forfeiture of past service. The period/periods of such interruptions will not count as service qualifying as service for pension. The provisions of this rule are effective from the 19th September 1974. Explanation:- A strike of the kind as defined in the Karnataka Civil Services (Prevention of strike) Act 1966 including refusal or absentation from doing work though physically present at the place of duty by resort to pendown strike or stay- - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 in-strike or other methods shall be deemed to be unauthorised absence from duty for purposes of this rule.” 14. As could be seen from the above, the length of qualifying service would be the entire service that the employee renders to an institution and the commencement of qualifying service is the date on which the grant was allowed to an employee by the Department. 15. In this case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner’s post was admitted to grant when he was initially appointed in the year 1979 itself. Consequently, for the purpose of computing the entire length of service from 1979 till 31.08.2012 (i.e., the date on which the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation) will have to be construed as qualifying service. 16. However, learned AAG sought to put forth an argument that the petitioner’s salary by means of grant was given to the institution only till 2003 when - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 he was suspended and therefore, for the purpose of computing the length of qualifying service, only the service from the year 1979 to 2003 will have to be taken into consideration. 17. In my view, this argument would not be correct. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed in the year 1979 and when he was appointed, his post was already admitted to grant. The orders of suspension that were passed against him were set aside by the Revisional Authority and confirmed right up to the Apex Court. Thus, notwithstanding the fact that the institution did not choose to reinstate the petitioner, he is deemed to have continued in service till he attained the age of superannuation. Therefore, the argument that the length of qualifying service would be restricted to 11.11.2003 cannot be accepted. The Department would therefore have to consider the claim of pension of the petitioner by computing the service by taking into consideration the entire length - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:7279 WP No. 27191 of 2017 of qualifying service from 1979 and also the last pay that was drawn by the petitioner on 31.08.2012 and thereafter make over the same to the petitioner. 18. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has settled his differences with the Management by accepting Rs.62 lakhs voluntarily, in my view, the petitioner would not be entitled for interest on the arrears of pension to be computed pursuant to this order, which would be computed and made over to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 19. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK/PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 84