SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 24831

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD, J
MR. G.LAKSHMINARASIMHAIAH – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT-CUM-CHAIRMAN, KARNATAKA STATE SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 21254 OF 2019 (S-RES)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. RAJARAM T.
For the Respondents: SRI. VIKAS R., AGA FOR R1; SRI. B.C.PRABHAKAR

The court mandates timely consideration of employee representations regarding pay scale implementation without ruling on their merits.

Headnote:This Writ Petition, filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeks to quash certain resolutions and direct the extension of benefits related to pay scales as per the Sixth State Pay Commission. The petitioners, employees of the second respondent-Corporation, contest the decision to implement the revised pay scales effective from a later date than desired, citing discrepancies with actions in other entities. The court, without adjudicating the merits, directs the Corporation to consider the representations of the petitioners expeditiously within three months. Henceforth, the petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek benefits of revised pay scales from an earlier implementation date. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court directs consideration of representations expeditiously. (Para 4)

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed under ArticleS.226 & 227 of the Constitution of India , seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari and quash the resolution 15/290/2018-19 Agenda No.22 dated 26.09.2018 which is produced and marked as Annexure-E and Circular bearing No.KARBINI/ADMIN/3103/2018-19 dated 31.10.2018 which is produced and marked as Annexure-G are liable to be quashed by this Hon’ble Court.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction, directing the respondents to extend the benefits of revision of pay scales to the petitioner as per Annexures A, B, C and D with effect from 01.04.2018 and with further direction to pay the difference of salary or emoluments and with other consequential benefits arising out of the revision of pay scales.”

2. The petitioners are employees of the second respondent–Corporation. The State Government, vide Annexure-A, adopted the recommendations of the Sixth State Pay Commission and revised the pay scale, effective from 01.07.2017, with the monetary benefits arising from the revised pay scale admissible from 01.04.2018. Pursuant to the said Government Order, the respondent– Corporation adopted the Sixth Pay Commission and passed a resolution, vide Annexure-E, to implement the same with effect from 01.10.2018. In furtherance of this, a Circular dated 31.10.2018, vide Annexure-G, was issued. Aggrieved by this, the petitioners have approached this Court.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that even though the petitioners have challenged the decision taken by the Corporation to implement the Sixth Pay Commission from 01.10.2018, they will not press that prayer since they have also submitted representations to the Corporation, vide Annexures-H and J series, contending that in all other Boards and Corporations, the Sixth Pay Commission has been implemented from 01.04.2018, in line with the Government Order. Accordingly, the petitioners have requested the Corporation to reconsider its decision and implement the Sixth Pay Commission from 01.04.2018 for its employees as well.

4. Since the representations are still pending before the Corporation, and under the circumstances, without going into the merits of the case, the second respondent– Corporation is directed to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners, vide Annexures-H and J series, regarding the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission from 01.04.2018, and take a decision in accordance with law, and in a sympathetic manner, as expeditiously as possible, and in any event, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

All contentions of the parties are left open.

With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top