Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Parappa I. Hulakund – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer:
A. Struck down the impugned legislation viz., The Karnataka Education (Amendment) Act 2015 (Karnataka Act No.4/2015) published in Karnataka Gazette dated 09.01.2015 passed by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-F as Ultra Virus as it is opposed to the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and it encroaches upon the judicial powers of the Courts and consequently Direct the Respondents to Grant the benefit of One Additional increment to the petitioners for having passed Kannada Language Examination or Equivalent to it by allowing the writ petition in the interest of justice and equity.
B. Issue a writ of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, Order or Direction, directing the respondents to extend the benefit of the Karnataka Civil Services (Service and Kannada Language Examination) Rules, 1974 read with the Circular dated 03.11.2000 and 12.09.2001 (Produced at Annexure-A and B) to the petitioners i.e., grant of one additional increment with all consequential benefits to the petitioners.
C. Pass any other appropriate Order, Writ or directions as this Hon’ble court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances
Legislation denying equal increments to private aided educational staff for Kannada exams is unconstitutional as it violates Article 14, undermining principles of equality and judicial authority.
The amendment to deny additional increments to teaching staff of private aided institutions is unconstitutional, violating principles of equality and the doctrine of separation of powers.
Legislative amendments cannot nullify judicial decisions affirming equal treatment rights for teaching staff in aided institutions, as it violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
(1) Amendment to Section 2(e) and insertion of Section 13A to Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, with retrospective effect from 3rd April 1997 vide Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, cannot be categori....
As per the newly inserted Rule 17 of the KER, any pecuniary loss caused to the Government on account of the creation on holding of such posts is to be recovered from the teacher in charge of the clas....
The court established that the State has the authority to set educational qualifications for teachers and that the writ court cannot alter policy decisions unless they are found to be arbitrary or un....
Aided school teachers cannot contest elections as it contradicts their duties under the Right to Education Act, reinforcing the importance of quality education.
Duties relating to election to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament relate to conduct of elections and consequent deployment of teachers on the days of poll and counting, the t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
