ORDER

The petitioner, in this writ petition, challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 21.06.2023 passed in Application.No.5954/2022 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru, (for short 'the Tribunal'), wherein the Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.

2. The facts that are apposite for consideration as borne out from the pleadings are as follows:

The petitioner belongs to Vokkaliga caste as per the Income and Caste Certificate dated 21.01.1994 issued by the Tahsildar of Kollegala Taluk. Vokkaliga Caste was in Group-'C'

as per caste list of the Government Order dated 13.10.1986.

3. In the year 1994, the then Deputy Director, Department of Public Instructions, Mysuru issued a Publication dated 20.01.1994 and invited application for the posts of Primary School Teachers. In the said recruitment process, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Primary School Teacher in the pay scale of Rs.1130-2100 in Chamarajanagara Taluk vide Memorandum dated 02.08.1994. The appointment was subject to the condition on production of reservation/validity Certificate and the probationary period is for a period of two years. The petitioner reported for duty on 12.08.1994.

4. The Government of Karnataka vide order dated

20.06.1995, extended the reservation policy dated 17.09.1994 to direct recruitment to civil posts in the State Government and by this the 'creamy layer' policy came into existence for reservation purpose in direct recruitment to civil posts in the State Government. The petitioner contends that the reservation claim of the petitioner came to be rejected vide order dated 24.07.1995. According to the petitioner, the State has issued an order dated 14.02.1996 that the 'creamy layer' policy would come into effect from 01.01.1994. Accordingly, the petitioner has been categorized under '3A' Category for reservation purpose and at the relevant time, the income of the family of the petitioner including the salary income of her husband, who was serving as Village Accountant was well within the ceiling limit prescribed for 'creamy layer'.

5. The Deputy Director issued Memorandum dated

18.09.1996 stating that the probationary period was satisfactorily completed. However, subsequently based on the order dated 24.07.1995, vide order dated 22.02.1999, without any notice to the petitioner, the order of satisfactory declaration of probation came to be cancelled and the petitioner was given minimum basic pay of time scale.

6. The order dated 24.07.1995 was challenged before this Court and this Court directed the District Income and Caste Verification Committee, Chamarajanagara District to consider the case of the petitioner and the same came to be rejected again vide Endorsement dated 10.06.2016, based on the proceedings of the committee dated 23.05.2016. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Authority and the claim of the petitioner was upheld by the said Authority vide order dated 22.11.2018, pursuant to which the validity Certificate dated NIL was issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, the probation was declared to be satisfactorily completed with effect from 27.10.2021 vide Memorandum dated 06.12.2021. The petitioner contends that she is legally entitled to consider the completion of probation with effect from 02.08.1996 itself. 7. It is the further contention of the petitioner that in the matter of pay fixation, the second respondent has held vide Impugned Communication dated 28.03.2022, that the petitioner's probation has been declared to be completed satisfactorily only on 27.10.2021. Therefore, the pay of the petitioner is to be fixed notionally and the petitioner cannot be paid arrears with regard to Rule 51-A of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1957. Accordingly, the Impugned Memorandum came to be issued by the third respondent dated 11.05.2022 followed by that of the fourth respondent dated 06.06.2022. The rejection of the arrears of salary payable to the petitioner is challenged by he