Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31805 (KAR)

STATE OF KARNATAKA v. KARNATAKA RAJYA SARKARI GRAMEENA

WA/1040/2022 · 2025-01-21

Anu Sivaraman, Vijaykumar A Patil

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2517-DB WA No. 1040 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO. 1040 OF 2022 (L-MW) BETWEEN: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 2. PUBLIC LIBRARY DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, VISVESWARAIAH TOWER, BANGALORE-560 001. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR DISTRICT CENTRAL GRANTHALAYA K T SHAMAIAH GOWDA ROAD, SHIMOGA - 577221 4. ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO LABOUR DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU -560001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.REUBEN JACOB, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH SRI.DEVARAJ.C.H, GOVT. ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2517-DB WA No. 1040 of 2022 AND: KARNATAKA RAJYA SARKARI GRAMEENA GRANTHALAYAGALA NOWKARARA SANGHA (REGD) HEAD OFFICE, SHIMOGA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI. K. V. SATHYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KODANAKATTE VILLAGE, HOSABALE POST, SORABA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577434 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.NARAYAN MAYYAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S.R.HEGDE HUDLAMANE, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO a)ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21/04/2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED HONBLE SINGLE BENCH COURT IN THE WP NO.22420/2017 b)PASS ANY SUCH OTHER ORDER/S. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2517-DB WA No. 1040 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. It is submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellants that the writ petition had been disposed of by the judgment under appeal, setting aside the impugned order at Annexure-K dated 22.04.2017 as well as the Notification at Annexure-P dated 04.09.2017. However, liberty was reserved in favour of the respondents therein, who are the appellants herein, to pass appropriate/suitable orders, directions, circulars, notifications, etc., in accordance with law. 3. It is submitted that even though notifications have been issued thereafter with regard to payment of minimum wages and though minimum wages are being paid to the members of the respondent since 2023, the liberty granted to the appellants to pass - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2517-DB WA No. 1040 of 2022 appropriate/suitable orders, directions, circulars, notifications in accordance with law has not been exercised by the State Government as such. 4. It is further contended that most of the libraries where the members of the respondent-organization are working now stand transferred to RDPR department and a formal decision has to be taken by the appropriate departments in the government, in accordance with law. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that the learned Single Judge had considered all the contentions and had rendered a judgment taking note of all legal and factual contentions raised. 6. It is further contended that there were orders directing payment of the difference between the wages actually paid and the minimum wages notified by the Notification dated 05.08.2016, but the said amount had not been paid to the respondents. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2517-DB WA No. 1040 of 2022 7. Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the submissions made on either side, we are of the opinion that since the learned Single Judge has reserved liberty in favour of the respondents to pass proper orders in accordance with law, the writ appeal does not require to be considered on its merits. The appeal is therefore, disposed of with liberty as granted by the learned Single Judge. 8. It is made clear that the benefits as available to the writ petitioners on the basis of the notification dated 05.08.2016 shall be made available to them in accordance with law, without further delay Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3