- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 1844 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. KARNATAKA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED A GOVERNMENT COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR TTMC A BLOCK, BMTC COMPLES SHANTHINAGAR, K H ROAD BENGALURU 560027 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. THE DIRECTOR- OPERATIONS, KARNATAKA STATE ELECTRONICS DEVELOPMENT, CORPORATION LIMITED A GOVERNMENT COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: 2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'A' BLOCK, BMTC, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560027 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NISHANTH A V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR S N SHEKAR S/O L ATE SRI S NARAYANACHAR AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, NO.113, 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 CHIKKA KALLASANDRA, BENGALURU-560061 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. MANJULA N. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NAIK V.S., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.09.2024, PASSED IN WP No. 62591/2016 (S-RES) BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION BEARING WP No. 62591/2016 (S-RES) FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN, ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present writ appeal has been filed by the Karnataka State Electronics Development Corporation Limited (for short 'the Corporation'), a State Government undertaking, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 23.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.62591/2016 (S- RES). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the learned Single Judge. 3. The petitioner had filed W.P.No.62591/2016 against the Office Memorandum bearing Ref.No.KSEDC/PER/GM/2012 dated 26.10.2012 and Endorsement bearing Ref.No.KSEDC/EST/DO/ED/2016-17 dated 18.10.2016, issued by the 2nd respondent, whereby the petitioner was denied the benefit of earned leave. 4. The petitioner was dismissed from service on 22.06.1998 and the statutory appeal filed against the dismissal order also came to be dismissed. 5. The petitioner had filed W.P.No.18969/2006 impugning the order of dismissal and order passed by the appellate authority in the statutory appeal. The learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 12.10.2011 set aside the order of punishment of dismissal from service and directed restatement of the petitioner with 25% back wages. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 6. The Corporation filed W.A.No.17174/2011 and the petitioner also filed W.A.No.17299/2011 aggrieved by confining only to 25% back wages. During the pendency of these two appeals before the Division Bench, the petitioner and the Corporation entered into an agreement, which has been taken note of, in the judgment of the Division Bench dated 13.02.2012. The judgment and order dated 13.02.2012 reads as under:- "With good counsel of learned Advocates for the parties an agreed arrangement has been arrived at. The officer concerned is willing to forego backwages specified at 25% in the impugned order. So far as continuity of service is concerned, the Management has consented for continuity of service with regard to pay fixation for all purposes including leave and increments. With regard to reinstatement, it has been agreed that the Management shall reinstate him as a Manager, though in the impugned order, reinstatement to the original post has been directed. However, learned counsel for the Management submits that at that time, the Company was in the business of manufacture of Television sets and it has now changed its business to IT industry. Hence, the contention is that the officer may not be - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 presently competent to discharge those duties. It is, therefore submitted that he will be taken back to the service in the post of Manager. 2. Learned counsel for the Management further clarifies that on his appointment as Manager, he will be entitled to further promotions in the cadre, as per the promotion policy of the Company. The officer who is present in Court states that he shall report for duty on 17.02.2012 at 10.30 A.M before the Managing Director in the Head office. Both the appeals are allowed in the above terms." 7. Thus, in terms of the agreement arrived between the parties, both appeals were allowed. The petitioner had given up 25% back wages as directed by the learned Single Judge in lieu of continuity of service with regard to pay fixation for all purposes including leave and increments. 8. Learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order has taken note of the order passed by the Division Bench on 13.02.2012 on the basis of the agreement - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 arrived at between the parties and therefore, has passed the Office Memorandum dated 26.10.2012 and endorsement dated 18.10.2016 denying the benefit of leave encashment to the petitioner. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent submits Rule 62 of the Karnataka State Electronic Development Corporation Limited (Service Rules), 1980, reads as under:- "62-1. When application should be submitted: Application for earned leave shall ordinarily be submitted well in advance, atleast by fortnight. Under extraordinary circumstances, management may relax this notice period at its discretion. 2. Calculation of Earned Leave: Earned Leave shall be calculated at one eleventh of the days spent on duty." 10. These Rules were very much in existence when the parties entered into an agreement before the Division Bench and the Division Bench passed the judgment dated - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 13.02.2012 in W.A.No.17174/2011 and connected with W.A.No.17299/2011. 11. Despite Rule 62 as extracted above, the Corporation agreed to give continuity of service and for the purpose of providing increment etc., pay fixation and benefit of leave. When the parties have entered into an agreement despite this Rule, they are bound by the judgment passed by this Court on 13.01.2012 in W.A.No.17174/2011 along with W.A.No.17299/2011. It is not open to the Corporation to take a different stand than taken before the Division Bench in W.A.No.17174/2011. The Petitioner had given up 25% of the back wages in lieu of the continuity of service, leave and increments. Once petitioner was made to believe that he would be given all the benefits of continuity of service with regard to pay fixation for all purposes including leave and increments, now it would not be open to the Corporation to contend otherwise. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45154-DB WA No. 1844 of 2024 12. Therefore, we find no substance in this writ appeal, which is why it is dismissed. 13. The benefit of encashment of earned leave shall be given to the petitioner within period of 4 weeks by the Corporation. 14. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending I.As. if any, also stand dismissed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8