- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 62922 OF 2011 (S-R) BETWEEN: SHARANAPPA S/O. MAHALINGAPPA PADAGANUR, AGE: 62 YEARS, R/O: NEELAVENI BUILDING, 10TH CROSS, SAPTAPUR, DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI HANUMANTAPPA YANKAPPA IRAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY, BY ITS REGISTRAR, PAVATE NAGAR, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. ARCHANA A. MAGADUM, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION IS PRAYING TO 1. A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER NO. KaVV/ Si A Su V/ Shikshaketara/ 4/ 2010/ 1107 DATED 18/05/2010 AND THE ORDER NO. KaVV/ Si A Su V/ Shikshaketara/ 4/ 2011/ 8037 DATED 18/01/2011, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT, THE COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURES-A Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 AND B. 2. A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO TREAT THE DEEMED DATE OF THE PROMOTION OF THE PETIIONER IN THE POST OF ASSISTANT OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT WITH EFFECT FROM 05/06/1999 AND ALSO CONSEQUENTLY REFIX HIS DEEMED DATE OF THE PROMOTION IN THE POST OF THE OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT, AND TO REFIX THE PAY AND PENSION ACCORDINGLY AND RELEASE ALL THE ARREARS OF PAY AND PENSION TO THE PETITIONER. ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT WHICH THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED IN FAVOUR OF LTHE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION, WITH COST THROUGH OUT, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) The petitioner is before this Court calling in question orders dated 18.05.2010 and 18.01.2011, which denies the service rendered by the petitioner as an Assistant Office Superintendent on independent charge and seeks a consequential mandamus to declare the deemed date of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 promotion in the cadre of Assistant Office Superintendent with effect from 05.06.1999 and grant all consequential benefits. 2. Heard Sri Hanumantappa Yankappa Irapur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Archana A. Magadum, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: The petitioner joins the service of the respondent – Karnataka University as a Junior Clerk in the Accounts Section on 08.12.1969. On completion of 19 years of service, he was promoted as Senior Assistant with effect from 25.06.1988. In terms of the law, he was eligible to be promoted to the higher cadre as Assistant Office Superintendent. Though he was found to be eligible, was placed on independent charge on 05.06.1999 and not regular promotion. While the petitioner was working in the said independent post, retires from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2006. Later, the regular promotion in the cadre of the Assistant Office Superintendent was rearranged in terms of the order dated 08.01.2010 and as a result of which, the petitioner is promoted to the Assistant Office Superintendent with effect from 04.03.2001. Representations were submitted to rework the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 pension taking the period of promotion as Assistant Office Superintendent with effect from 05.06.1999 and not 04.03.2001. The latest of the representations is dated 27.11.2010, which comes to be rejected by the impugned endorsement dated 18.01.2011. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not placed on regular basis or incharge but was on independent charge, therefore, he was eligible to be promoted to the post of Assistant Office Superintendent. Learned counsel would further submit that in terms of the Karnataka State Civil Services (Regulation of Promotion, Pay and Pension) Rules, 1978, the petitioner is entitled to be granted the date of regular promotion from the date of independent charge. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondent - University would take this Court through the detailed statement of objections filed and put vehement opposition to the grant of the prayer that is sought by the petitioner, contending that the petitioner has accepted the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 promotion as Assistant Office Superintendent with effect from 04.03.2001 and now, cannot contend that he should be granted benefits from the date on which he was placed on independent charge to the said post. It is only an incharge arrangement with charge allowance, which will not give any right to an employee, she would seek dismissal of the petition. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and have perused the material on record. 7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. It would be suffice to narrate from the date on which the petitioner was placed on independent charge, which comes about on 05.06.1999. The order insofar it concerns the petitioner reads as follows: “Karnatak University, Dharwad NO.KU DPAR SNT(1)/99/1351 Date: 5.6.1999 OFFICE ORDER REF: Vice-Chancellor's orders dt. 5.6.1999 xxx The following Officers/officials are hereby placed on independent charge in the cadres shown below and are posted/retained to work in the Sections mentioned against their names: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 Sl. No. 1. Name and present Place of working 2. Posted / retained 3. …. ….. ….. ASSISTANT OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT: xxx xxxx xxx 5. Sri S.M.Padaganur, Sr.Asst.. Category-I Cell, KUD. Retained to work in Cat-l Cell.” (Emphasis added) The office order is clear that the names that are found in the office order are placed on independent charge in the cadre shown or retained in the section they are working. The petitioner was working as an Assistant Office Superintendent and is retained in the said post. He is placed on independent charge in the office of the Assistant Office Superintendent. This is again continued by the University in terms of another office order dated 02.07.2002. It reads as follows: “Karnatak University, Dharwad NO.KU/DPAR (NT)/2002/1816 Date: 2.7.2002 OFFICE ORDER - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 SUB: Independent Charge arrangement of various Non-teaching posts in the University. Sl. No. Name and present Place of working Transferred / retained …. ….. ….. ASSISTANT OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT: xxx xxxx xxx 2. S. M. Padaganur Sr.Asst. (Examination Section) Category-I Cell, KUD. Retained to work in Examination Section, K.U.Dharwad Xxxx The arrangements made on Ind. Charge is purely on temporary basis and until further orders. The above employees are entitled to charge allowance as per KCSR.” (Emphasis added) Here again, the petitioner is continued under independent charge. It was indicated that it was on temporary basis. The petitioner retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2006. He was working as Assistant Office Superintendent on independent charge at the time of his retirement. The claim now is, he should be promoted from 05.06.1999. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 8. The issue revolves around two statutes. One Rule 32 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (for short ‘the KCSR’), which empowers the employer to place an employee under independent charge arrangement and the other is, the Karnataka State Civil Services (Regulation of Promotion, Pay and Pension) Rules, 1978 (for short ‘the Rules’). Rule 32 of the KCSR reads as follows: “32. Instead of appointing a Government servant to officiate, it is also permissible to appoint him to be in charge of the current duties of a vacant post. In such a case a “charge allowance” (addition pay) is payable as specified in Rule 68. [Note 1].-A Government servant can be appointed under this Rule to be in-charge of the current duties of a vacant post only if he is eligible to be promoted to officiate in that post according to the Cadre and Recruitment Rules applicable to that post or if he is holding a post in an equivalent or higher grade.] [Note 2]. The provisions of this Rule apply also to cases where a Government servant being relieved of his own appointment is appointed to be in independent charge of a higher appointment as a temporary measure.]” (Emphasis supplied) Instead of appointing a government servant to officiate, which would mean regular promotion, it is also permissible to appoint on incharge of the current duties to a vacant post. Note 1 to - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 Rule 32 is unequivocal. A government servant can be appointed under Rule 32 only if he is eligible to be promoted, according to the cadre and recruitment rules. Therefore, it is trite law that if an employee is eligible to be promoted on regular basis, only that government servant can be placed under Rule 32 of the KCSR. 9. The petitioner was placed on independent charge in the post of Assistant Office Superintendent on 05.06.1999 and continues to be in the said post. He retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2006. His promotion ought to have been regulated on the date of which he was placed under independent charge. That having not been done, the petitioner is right in contending that his pension should be reworked in terms of the Rules. The Rule 2 of the Rules, reads as follows: “2. Promotion.- Promotion of a civil servant may be made with effect from a retrospective date.- (1) if his claim for promotion.- (a) was withheld on account of disciplinary proceeding or criminal Prosecution of both pending against him and he is exonerated or acquitted subsequently, or (b) was not considered on the ground that he was working in some other department on deputation or otherwise; or - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 (c) was not considered on the ground that he was wrongly or incorrectly described in the provisional or final inter-State Seniority List or gradation list; (or) (d) was passed over on account of adverse remarks in his Confidential Reports which were expunged subsequently. (2) If, while operating the gradation list or the provisional inter-State Seniority List or any other inter- State Seniority List not being a final one, he was not considered for promotion for no justifiable reason xxxxx or (3) If, while being eligible according to his seniority in the list that was in force and otherwise fit for promotion according to Cadre and Recruitment Rules he had only been placed in independent charge of the post by the Competent Authority and has discharged the duties of the said post:” (Emphasis supplied) In the light of the afore-quoted provisions of law, the petition deserves to succeed as the endorsements are not in tune with the afore-quoted mandate of the statute. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed. b. The endorsements dated 18.05.2010 and 18.01.2011 stand quashed. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3556 WP No. 62922 of 2011 c. Mandamus issues to the respondent – Karnataka University to reconsider the case of the petitioner, by reworking the pension payable to the petitioner considering the date of promotion to the post of Assistant Office Superintendent on 05.06.1999 and all consequential benefits that would flow from the quashment of the impugned endorsements, bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order, within three months from the date of the receipt of a copy of the order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RHR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4