Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
K S Hemalekha, J
SRI.SHANTAPPA AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners sought benefits after retirement based on temporary appointments. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents argued that temporary appointments do not confer regular status. (Para 4) |
| 3. court analyzed kcsr rules regarding promotion and benefits. (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 4. writ petition dismissed based on the analysis of kcsr provisions. (Para 12) |
CAV ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA)
The petitioners are challenging the order dated 05.03.2018 in Application Nos.11124 and 11125 of 2016 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), wherein the applicants’ plea for grant of time scale pay, increments and pensionary benefits for the post of Reserve Sub-Inspector(RSI) (Higher Post) under Rule 42-B of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (for short, ‘KCSR’), was dismissed and the endorsements issued by the Inspector General of Police stood confirmed.
2. The petitioners were working as Armed Police Constables in Police Department. Vide order dated 30.01.2013, they were placed in independent charge of vacant RSI post under Rule 32 read with Rule 68 of KCSR. The petitioners continued to perform duties of RSI until their r
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
