Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64084 (KAR)

SHRI.ARUNKUMAR S/O SANGAPPA DESAI v. SECRETARY,

WP/108612/2017 · 2025-12-15

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18138 WP No. 108612 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 108612 OF 2017 (S-R) BETWEEN: SHRI. ARUNKUMAR S/O SANGAPPA DESAI AGE: 61, OCC: DOCTOR, NEAR AMBEDKAR HALL, SADASHIV NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY, MEDICAL EDUCATION, THE HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY THE SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 4. THE CHAIRMAN THE GOVERNING COUNCIL, THE BELGAUM INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, BELAGAVI. Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18138 WP No. 108612 of 2017 5. THE DIRECTOR IN-CHARGE, THE BELGAUM INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. UDAYASINGH H RAJAPUT, ADV. FOR R5; R4 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS DIRECTING TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17-08-2016 (ANNEXURE-A) WITHIN A STIPULATED PERIOD AND INTIMATE ITS DECISION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF LAW AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: 1. This Hon'ble Court may please to issue writ of mandamus against the Respondents directing to consider the representation dated 17-08-2016 (Annexure-A) within a stipulated period and intimate its decision within the framework of law. 2. This Hon'ble Court may please to issue Writ of Mandamus or directions to the Respondents to extend the pension and other retiral benefits to the Petitioner in pursuance of the Bye-Laws, the Service Rules and the Karnataka Civil Services Rules to grant the relief of retiral benefits including pension as prayed for by the Petitioner in his representation dated 17-08-2016. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18138 WP No. 108612 of 2017 3. Any other order as this Hon'ble authority may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner is appointed as a Professor in Pediatrics in the Belgaum Institute of Medical Sciences, Belgaum on 01.07.2005 and retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.2016. The petitioner since then has been projecting the grievance with regard to revised pension and all other terminal benefits to be paid to the petitioner which is said to be unpaid even today. The petitioner is said to have submitted representations before the authorities for grant of pension and other terminal benefits, all of which have gone unheeded and therefore the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition. 3. The representation of the petitioner is in great detail where the petitioner does seek justification for seeking pension and other terminal benefits at the hands of the respondent. 4. In the light of the representation pending consideration at the hands of the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition directing the respondent Nos.1 and 4, joint and several, to consider the representation - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18138 WP No. 108612 of 2017 and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Since the matter is languishing for the last 8 years and the direction is only to consider the representation for grant of pension and other terminal benefits, I deem it appropriate to fix a time limit of 8 weeks for consideration of said representation and passing of necessary orders if not already considered and passed. If considered and order is passed, it is open to the petitioner to avail such remedy as is available in law. Ordered accordingly, Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Kmv CT CNB