Long-term employees engaged in continuous service are entitled to regularization and benefits even post-retirement if their claims remain pending during their service, subject to compliance with applicable laws.

ORDER :

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to regularize the service of the petitioner in the 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat in the cadre of Attender cum Bill Collector with effect from 10.01.1994, as also the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.112917/2014.

2. Heard Ms.Vaibhavi Inamdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Girija S.Hiremath, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.Vishwanath Hegde, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

(a) The petitioner joins the service of the 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat as an Attender cum Bill Collector with a consolidated pay fixed at Rs.500/- by the 4^th respondent- Gram Panchayat. The petitioner since then has been working on continuous basis. This fact is not in dispute. On 22.09.2006, a Resolution comes to be passed by the 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat increasing monthly salary of the petitioner- consolidated pay from Rs.500/- to Rs.800/-. Again the salary from Rs.800/- was increased to Rs.1,200/- in terms of another Resolution dated 05.03.2008. The petitioner then continued to work, submits a representation seeking enhancement of payment at Rs.2,500/- per month which was by then the prevailing consolidated pay rendered to identically placed employees.

(b) The petitioner goes on submitting representations for increase in pay and sought pay at Rs.3,059/- in terms of a representation dated 23.09.2010. When things stood thus, the Government of Karnataka issued a Notification revising minimum wages to employees who were working in local bodies. Pursuant to the Notification, a Resolution is passed by the Gram Panchayat increasing the monthly salary of the petitioner to Rs.2,500/- with effect from the said month and again to Rs.3,250/- on 13.12.2011. When things stood thus, the Taluk Panchayat, Sirsi directs the 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat to initiate steps to regularize the service of the petitioner and accord the benefit of a Government order dated 04.01.2008. The 4^th respondent then communicates to the Chief Executive Officer of the Taluk Panchayat that there has been delay in furnishing documents concerning the petitioner. Therefore, the regularization initiation has not come about.

(c) The petitioner then files a writ petition seeking a direction to the 4^th respondent to regularize the service of the petitioner in W.P.No.112917/2014. During the subsistence of the said writ petition, the petitioner retires on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2015. Therefore, the petitioner prior to his retirement, had rendered 21 years of continuous service and the proposal for regularizing the service of the petitioner was on the cards even before his retirement. The said writ petition filed in the year 2014 comes to be disposed on 19.11.2021 with a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization which was not considered. Therefore, the petitioner had to invoke the contempt jurisdiction of this Court by filing CCC No.100086/2022 which comes to be disposed on 10.06.2022 on the score that the arrears of salary to the tune of Rs.1,71,258/-was paid and it was in substantial compliance with the order passed by the learned Single Judge and the complainant- petitioner was rendered liberty to work out his remedies with regard to the proposal of regularization which was pending before the competent authority then. The non-regularization of the petitioner is what has driven him to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Learned counsel Ms.Vaibhavi Inamdar, appearing for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was appointed pursuant to a resolution of the Gram Panchayat, owing to a vacancy of the post of attender. He was continued in the said post up to the date of his retirement. During the subsistence of his service, regularization had been sought for, by submitt