IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.2564 OF 2026 (L-RES)

BETWEEN:

CH.RAMACHANDRI S/O.BALAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS EARLIER WORKING AS SKILLED FARM WORKER (T/S)

REGIONAL SERICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION (RSRS)

CENTRAL SILK BOARD MULUGU SIDDIPET DISTRICT TELANGANA-502 279 AND R/AT NO.1-83 MUDIMYAL, CHEVELLA K.V.RANGAREDDY DISTRICT TELANGANA-501 503 …PETITIONER (BY SRI GURURAJA P.B. FOR SRI M.NARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATES)

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARNATAKA

1. THE CENTRAL SILK BOARD REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY CSB COMPLEX BTM LAYOUT MADIWALA BENGALURU-560 068

2. THE DIRECTOR CENTRAL SILK BOARD CSR AND TI, SRIRAMPURA MYSURU-570 008

3. SCIENTIST AND HEAD RSRS, CSR AND TI CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILES GOVT. OF INDIA SKLTS HORTICULTURE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS MULUGU TELENGANA-502 279 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.S.NARASIMHA SWAMY, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE MEMORANDUM DATED 31.12.2025 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F AS THE SAME IS OPPOSED TO THE AWARD DATED 01.04.2013 IN CR.NO.151/2007 PASSED BY THE CGIT MARKED AT ANNEXURE-B AND ALSO SECTION 18(3)(d) OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 AND ARTICLES 14 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.01.2026 to continue in service under the respondents till the petitioner completes the age of 60 years, which according to the petitioner is the age of superannuation.

2. The petitioner had filed the petition in the light of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Central Silk Board vs Employees Union of Central Silk Board & Another¹ wherein, in terms of the order dated 04.09.2024, this Court has dismissed the petition filed by respondent No.1-Central Silk Board and confirmed the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court.

3. In terms of the award dated 01.04.2013, the Tribunal has held that age of superannuation of the Timescale Farm Workers of the respondent establishment would be 60 years and not 55 years as contended by the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the award passed by the Tribunal is not questioned by the respondents and it has attained finality.

W.P. No.18693/2014

5. Thus, the learned counsel would submit that the petitioner cannot be superannuated at the age of 58, and the petitioner is entitled to continue as the employee of respondent No.1 till the petitioner completes 60 years.

6. Learned counsel for respondents would submit that though the Board of respondent No.1 has passed a resolution to implement the order, with effect from the date of the order passed in Central Silk Board (supra), the Board is yet to receive the approval from the Union of India for the decision taken by the Board. It is further submitted that since respondents are awaiting the decision of Union of India, from the perspective of the respondents the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal has not yet attained finality.

7. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.

8. It is not in dispute that the award passed by the Tribunal enhancing the age of retirement to 60 years from 55 years is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Central Silk Board (supra). It is further not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Timescale Farm Worker with respondent No.1. The petitioner has completed 58 years after the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court confirming the award