- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 21467 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT (POLICE) VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE IN KARNATAKA, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU'- 560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, EAST DIVISION, BANGALORE CITY, ULSOOR MAIN ROAD, ULSOOR, BANGALORE-560008. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 AND: SRI NAGARAJ B S/O BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 51YEARS, CIVIL POLICE CONSTABLE-5841, ULSOOR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560008. RESIDING AT NEAR RAJIV GANDHI COLLEGE, TUDA LAYOUT, SIRA GATE, TUMKUR-572106. …RESPONDENT WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER/DIRECTION TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.09.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KSAT, BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.1864/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 15.09.2021 in Application No.1864/2021 with the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The respondent has filed this application with the Tribunal calling in question the Memorandum dated 23.04.2021 addressed by the third petitioner to him to furnish affirmation for cancellation of the Dearness Allowance [DA] for the period starting from the date of joining. The third petitioner has referred to Rule 41-C of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules [for short, 'the KCS Rules']. 2. The Tribunal has opined that the pay protection contemplated under Rule 41-C of the KCS Rules protects even the pension and the DA paid. The Tribunal's reasoning is as under: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 "A plain reading of the above provision makes it crystal clear that the pay of re-employed ex-service pensioners in the rank of non-commissioned officers and below has to be re-fixed under Rule 41-C of KCSR and considering that such re-fixation ignores the pension received from military authorities, the applicant is eligible for receiving DA on pension too. Therefore, the direction of the respondent no.3 to the Police Inspector under whom the applicant is working to obtain the consent of the applicant to surrender DA on pension in order to get the protection of pay is without any basis. In this context, it may not be out of place to mention that the DA on pension is actually released by the military authorities to the re-employed pensioners and in the fitness of things, it is for the military authorities to decide whether the DA on pension is payable to the re- employed pensioner, if it is contrary to rules." 3. Mr. Vikas Rojipura, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners, is heard on - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 the afore. The respondent has retired from military service on 29.02.2008 [after over 15 years of service] and he is recruited as a Civil Police Constable with the State Police Department on 22.12.2011. The petitioner’s pay is fixed based on his last drawn salary from the Military. The question for consideration is: whether the third petitioner's Memorandum dated 23.04.2021 is permissible and whether there must be interference with the Tribunal's order as against such Memorandum, is examined in the light of Rule 41-C Sub-clause (i) to (iv). 4. These Sub-clauses stipulate how the pay protection operates if the pay drawn in the military service is equal to a stage in the time scale of the post or otherwise, and Sub-clause (v) of Rule 41-C is categorical that for fixation of pay, the basic pay as part of the last drawn from the military service must be considered and does not include any other allowance and pension and pension equivalent to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45697-DB WP No. 21467 of 2025 Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity must be ignored. This Court therefore opines, because of the expressed language in the Rules, there is no reason for interference and the petition stands rejected. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE RB