- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 106076 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. SANJAYA D. KORE S/O. DIGAMBAR KORE, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: MISSION MANAGER, SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURES, DISTRICT SKILL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, D.C. OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR A BLOCK DEVAGIRI, HAVERI, R/O. 17TH CROSS, A BLOCK BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, HAVERI – 581 110, TQ/DIST HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF SKILL DEVELOPMENT ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND LIVELIHOOD, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER AND PRESIDENT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, DAY-NULM, ROOM NO.306, 3RD FLOOR, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. 3. THE MISSION DIRECTOR (DAY=NULM) NATIONAL URBAN LIVELIHOOD MISSION, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, NO.4, 3RD FLOOR, MYSUGAR BUILDING, Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 OPP. TOWN HALL J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 021. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL, HAVERI-581 110. TQ/DIST HAVERI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1, R2, R4; SRI. AJITH ACHAPPA & SRI. DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED DATED 03.09.2024 ISSUED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT BEARING NO. 124270 FILE NO. NULM/ADMN/CORT/05/2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-A. II) ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 10.09.2024 ISSUED BY THE 4th RESPONDENT BEARING NO. JINAKO/SIBBANDI/VAHI-121/2018-19 AS PER ANNEXURE-B. III) ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE SALARY OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 29.12.2018 TO 20.11.2019 AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer. “A. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned dated 03.09.2024 issued by the 3rd respondent bearing no. 124270 file no. NULM/ADMN/CORT/05/2024 as per Annexure-A. B. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned endorsement dated 10.09.2024 issued by the 4th respondent bearing no. Jinako/ Sibbandi/ Vahi-121/2018-19 as per Annexure-B. C. Issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the salary of the petitioner for the period from 29.12.2018 to 20.11.2019. D. Grant any other relief as deems fit by this Hon’ble court in the circumstances of case in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Shriharsh A. Neelopant appearing for the petitioner, the learned AGA Smt. Girija S. Hiremath representing respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 and the learned counsels Sri. Ajith Achappa and Sri. Dayanand Bandi for respondent No.3. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 3. The petitioner is appointed as Mission Manager in the District Skill Development Office which is attached to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. It transpires that the petitioner was terminated from service without holding any enquiry on 27.12.2018. This comes to be challenged before this Court in W.P. No.103472/2019. The Co-ordinate Bench by its order dated 18.10.2019 allows the petition, sets aside the order of termination by the following order. “6. In the light of the above said decisions, when we look at the show cause notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, it is clear that the allegations of serious misconduct was made against the petitioner. The petitioner has given a reply to the said show case notice denying the allegations made against the petitioner. However, the Deputy Commissioner proceeds to pass the impugned order terminating the services of the petitioner, without conducting a disciplinary enquiry and offering an opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself. What is noticeable is that, even in the preamble of the impugned order of termination, the very same allegations as was made in the show cause notice has been reiterated. Therefore, it is quite evident that, the order of termination is not a simplicitor order of termination, but an order of punishment which leaves a stigma on the petitioner. 7. Therefore, in the light of the discussions made above, this Court is the opinion that the impugned order requires to be set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside. Needless to observe that, if the respondent-authorities feel that the petitioner has to be proceeded against, based on the charges made in the show cause notice, the respondentauthorities are at liberty to proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 8. The respondents are hereby directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with immediate effect.” 4. The reinstatement was directed with immediate effect. The Co-ordinate Bench did not observe anything other than the reinstatement to the petitioner. The petitioner then was reinstated and submits a representation seeking arrears of salary for the period between 24.12.2018 to 20.112019, the date on which he was reinstated. The said representation did not merit consideration. Therefore, he was before this Court in Writ Petition No.104400/2021. The said writ petition comes to be disposed by the following order. “3. xxxxx Thereafter, the petitioner has been reinstated on 19.11.2019 and he was working since then. The petitioner had made the representations to the respondents requesting to release arrears of salary for the period from 29.12.2018 to 20.11.2019. The said representation made by the petitioner is dated 29.01.2020 vide Annexure-‘F’. The said representation Annexure-‘F’ came to be forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has not considered the representation of the petitioner. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the petitioner is reinstated, he is entitled for salary (back wages) for the period from 29.12.2018 to 20.11.2019. The petitioner has right to make a representation claiming back wages/salary and respondent No.2 has to consider the said representation of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, writ petition is allowed. 4. The respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.01.2020 vide Annexure-‘F’ forwarded by respondent No.4 by letter - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 dated 11.02.2020 vide Annexure-‘G’ within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order in accordance with law. 5. The Co-ordinate Bench again did not direct payment of arrears of salary or back wages for the period that the petitioner was out of employment. The Co-ordinate Bench only directed payment of salary that was not paid after the reinstatement within a particular period and also directed consideration of a representation submitted by the petitioner on 29.01.2020, whereby the petitioner had sought the back wages during the period that he was out of employment. 6. After the said order, comes the subject petition seeking the aforequoted prayer. The prayer is for grant of salary between 29.12.2018 to 20.11.2019. Therefore, it is an admitted fact what the petitioner seeks is arrears of salary / back wages for the period that he was out of employment. The said claim has been turned down by the impugned order. The turning down is in strict consonance with law. The Co-ordinate Bench did not grant an order except reinstatement where though the petitioner had sought all back wages before the learned Judge in Writ Petition No.103472/2019, that having not been considered once, that having not been considered by subsequent petition, that cannot - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17190 WP No. 106076 of 2025 be granted answering the said prayer on the score that the petitioner did not work during the said period and on the principle of no work no pay, the said salary cannot be directed to be granted. 7. However, the said period would be taken note of for all other service benefits except back wages. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RSH/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33