- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 103895 OF 2025 (S-R) BETWEEN: SHRI CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O. MAHADEVAPPA MORAB, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT, BASAVESHWAR VIDYAVARDHAK POLYTECHNIC, BAGALKOTE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. UMESH C. AINAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, MINISTRY OF LAW & PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, R/BY ITS SECRETARY VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, BASAVESHWAR VIDYAVARDHAK POLYTECHNIC, BELAGAVI, RAICHUR ROAD, BAGALKOTE-587101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE (i) WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO DECLARE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3(1) AND (2) OF THE KARNATAKA PRIVATE AIDED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS EMPLOYEES REGULATION OF PAY, PENSION AND OTHER BENEFITS) ACT 2014 (KARNATAKA ACT 7 OF 2014) DATED 12.02.2014 MAPA 23 SHAK VARSHA 1935 NO. 115 VIDE ANNEXURE- C PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CONSEQUENTLY VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 STRUCK DOWN THE SAID PROVISIONS AS ULTRA- VIRUS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (ii) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RELEASE PENSIONERY BENEFITS FROM THE DATE OF INITIAL APPOINTMENT OF PETITIONER AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (i) “Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare the provisions of section 3(1) and (2) of the karnataka private aided educational institutions employees regulation of pay, pension and other benefits) act 2014 (karnataka act 7 of 2014) dated 12.02.2014 mapa 23 shak varsha 1935 no. 115 vide annexure- c passed by the 1st respondent as unconstitutional and consequently struck down the said provisions as ultra- virus of the constitution of india. (ii) Issue writ of mandamus directing respondent no.2 to release pensionery benefits from the date of initial appointment of petitioner and etc.” 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The petitioner is a retired non-teaching staff in 3rd respondent-Polytechnic college run by Basaveshwar - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 Vidya Vardhak, Sangh Bagalkote. He had joined his services in the Institution on 01.12.1987. The Institution is admitted to grant on 28.02.2007. The issue is whether the period between 01.12.1987 to 28.02.2007 should be reckoned for the purpose of calculation of the service benefits to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis is pending consideration before the Division Bench for it having been answered in favour of the Teachers. In an order passed in the case of Shri Manjunath K.R. S/o. Late Krishnaraje Urs Vs. The State of Karnataka and others in W.P. No.519/2021, disposed of on 10th February 2021, noticing the fact that the matter is pending consideration before the Division Bench, this Court in identical circumstances has passed the following order: “2. The petitioner in the writ petition was appointed as Lecture in Geography of a private aided educational institution to teaching post. He contend that his claim is covered in terms of order dated 16.08.2010 passed in W.P. No.25447/2010, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 order dated 22.09.2011 passed in W.A.No.4788/2010, order dated 02.07.2012 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC No.7365/2012, the order dated 06.12.2012 passed by the Apex Court in Review Petition (Civil) No.2364/2012, Government Order dated 22.02.2013, the order dated 30.07.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.11299-11309/2013 and the order dated 16.07.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.29293- 94/2013. 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents-State would accept that the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgments but submits that the matter is pending before the learned Division Bench. 4. This Court in W.P. Nos.9623-24/2015 disposed of on 13.01.2016, while noticing the fact of the pendency of writ appeal No.2476/2015, has held as follows: “4. But in order to overcome the judgments of this Court, the State had enacted the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulations of pay, pension and Other Benefits) Act, 2014, thereby denying the pay scale of University Grants Commission for the period mentioned above. The said Act was challenged by filing large numbers of writ petitions. The writ petitions were decided by common judgment in the case of Dr. B.K. Naik (supra). By the said judgment, this Court had struck down the Act as unconstitutional. This Court had further directed the Government to pay salary to the petitioners therein, and to others similarly situated persons, as was being paid before the impugned - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 enactment. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners before this Court is to extend the benefits of said judgment to them as well. 5. The learned counsel for the State submits that the judgment dated 10-7- 2015 passed in the case of Dr.B.K.Naik (supra) has been challenged before a learned Division Bench of this Court. The relevant extract of the order dated 27- 11-2015 passed by the learned Division Bench is as under: “Insofar as the in- service respondents are concerned, we record the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying their current emoluments in terms of the re-fixation, subject, however, to the result of the writ appeals. However, they are restrained from initiating any recovery proceedings for recovery of the arrears of pay”. 6. According to the said order, the learned Division Bench has recorded the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying - 6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:8175 WP No. 100438 of 2023 their current emoluments in terms of the re- fixation, subject to the result of the writ appeals. 7. Considering the fact that the learned Advocate General has made a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 statement before the learned Division Bench, and in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Dr.B.K. Naik (supra), this Court also directs the State to re-fix the pay scale payable to the petitioners. However, it should be made amply clear that the re-fixation of the pay scale would be subject to the decision of the writ appeal pending before this Court in Writ Appeal No.2476 of 2015.” 5. Since the petitioner is similarly situated and the issue raised is also similar, the writ petition stands disposed in terms of the aforesaid order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court with a direction to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law.” 5. Further, in the case of Sri A. Srikantegowda S/o. Appajigowda Vs. The State of Karnataka in W.P. No.3443/2021, disposed off on 18th February 2021, wherein this Court had disposed off the petition by observing as follows: “2. The petitioner in the writ petition was appointed as a Lecturer on 17.06.1991, to a of 2023 teaching post in Sri. Sardar Vallabhabai Patel PU College, a private aided educational institution. He contends that the claim is covered in terms of order dated 16.08.2010 passed in W.P. No.25447/2010, order dated 22.09.2011 passed in W.A.No.4788/2010, order dated 02.07.2012 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC No.7365/2012, the order dated 06.12.2012 passed by the Apex Court in Review Petition (Civil) No.2364/2012, Government Order dated 22.02.2013, the order dated 30.07.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.11299- 11309/2013 and the order dated 16.07.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.29293-94/2013. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents-State would accept that the matter is covered by the aforesaid judgments but submits that the matter is pending before the learned Division Bench. 4. This Court in W.P. Nos.9623-24/2015 disposed of on 13.01.2016, while noticing the fact of the pendency of writ appeal No.2476/2015, has held as follows: “4. But in order to overcome the judgments of this Court, the State had enacted the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulations of pay, pension and Other Benefits) Act, 2014, thereby denying the pay scale of University Grants Commission for the period mentioned above. The said Act was challenged by filing large numbers of writ petitions. The writ petitions were decided by common judgment in the case of Dr.B.K. Naik (supra). By the said judgment, this Court had struck down the Act as unconstitutional. This Court had further directed the Government to pay salary to the petitioners therein, and to others similarly situated persons, as was being paid before the impugned enactment. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners before this Court is to extend the benefits of said judgment to them as well. 5. The learned counsel for the State submits that the judgment dated 10- 7- 2015 passed in the case of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 Dr.B.K.Naik (supra) has been challenged before a learned Division Bench of this Court. The relevant extract of the order dated 27- 11- 2015 passed by the learned Division Bench is as under: “Insofar as the in-service respondents are concerned, we record the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying their current emoluments in terms of the re-fixation, subject, however, to the result of the writ appeals. However, they are restrained from initiating any recovery proceedings for recovery of the arrears of pay”. 6. According to the said order, the learned Division Bench has recorded the statement of the learned Advocate General that the State shall go on paying their current emoluments in terms of the re- fixation, subject to the result of the writ appeals. 7. Considering the fact that the learned Advocate General has made a statement before the learned Division Bench, and in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Dr.B.K. Naik (supra), this Court also directs the State to re-fix the pay scale payable to the petitioners. However, it should be made amply - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7913 WP No. 103895 of 2025 clear that the re- fixation of the pay scale would be subject to the decision of the writ appeal pending before this Court in Writ Appeal No.2476 of 2015.”” 6. Since the petitioner is similarly situated and the issue is also similar, the writ petition would stand disposed off in terms of aforequoted orders with the direction to the State to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CKK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30