1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NO. 41515 OF 2014 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAGHAVENDRA VARADHA.S

S/O LATE SATHYANARAYANACHAR,

AGED 58 YEARS,

R/A ANUSHI, AHWATHA KATTE,

RAA POST, BANTWALA TALUK,

DHAKSHINA KANNADA

DISTRICT-574211

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI.N.AMARESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE PRINCIPAL,

SRI.VENKATARAMANASWAMY COLLEGE,

(SRI.VENKATARAMANA SWAMY

VIDYA VARDHAKA SANGHA)

P.B.NO.01,BANTWAL

574211, D.K.

2.

THE COMMISSIONER,

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF

COLLEGE EDUCATION

K.R.CIRCLE,

BANGALORE-560048

3.

THE JOINT DIRECTOR

OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL

JOINT DIRECTOR

2

DEPARTMENT OF COLEGIATE EDUCATION

MANGALORE-575001

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.M.SUBRAMANYA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R1,

SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED

ORDER DATED 13.11.2013, AT ANNEXURE-G, ISSUED BY

THE R2 AND ON PERUSAL SET ASIDE THE SAME AS

ARBITRARY, DISCRIMINATORY AND IN VIOLATION OF

ARTICLE 14, 16 AND 19 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND

ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner, a retired Attender of the first

respondent-College is before this Court under Article

226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of

certiorari

to

quash

Annexure-G/Communication

bearing

No.PÁ²E:404:wæ¸ËAiÉÆÃ:¹Dgï-4:PÀÄ.¦A:2008-09

dated

13.11.2013 by which the period between 01.12.2007

to 31.08.2013 is treated as dies-non and for a

direction to treat the petitioner as voluntarily retired

from 31.03.2008 and re-calculate from the said date.

3

2.

Heard

Sri.N.Amaresh,

learned

counsel

appearing

for

the

petitioner,

as

well

as

Sri.

M.Subramanya

Bhat,

learned

counsel

for

respondent No.1 and learned AGA for respondent

Nos.2 and 3.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the petitioner was working as Attender in the first

respondent-College and while working, as such, he

submitted application seeking voluntary retirement

dated 27.12.2007. The first respondent failed to

consider the application of the petitioner for voluntary

retirement.

The

petitioner

approached

the

Commissioner for physically challenged praying for a

direction to the second respondent to consider his

application

for

voluntary

retirement.

The

Commissioner by order dated 04.02.2009 directed the

second respondent to consider the application of the

petitioner for voluntary retirement. Challenging the

4

said

order,

the

first

respondent

filed

W.P.No.41143/2010

and

the

petitioner

also

approached this Court in W.P.No.21539/2011 dated

17.01.2012 for a writ of mandamus to direct the

respondent to accept his application for voluntary

retirement dated 27.12.2007. After hearing both

sides, the petition was allowed directing the first

respondent

to

accept

the

voluntary

retirement

application of the petitioner dated 27.12.2007 and to

extend the consequential benefits and the writ petition

filed by the first respondent was dismissed. The first

respondent-College filed W.A.No.1133/2012 against

the order dated 17.01.2012 in W.P.41143/2010. The

Writ Appeal Court by judgment dated 29.01.2013

directed the Authority to consider the application of

the petitioner as expeditiously as possible to settle the

terminal benefits of the petitioner. Thereafter, the first

respondent submitted the proposal for treating the

period between 01.12.2007 to 31.08.2013 as dies-non

5

and to settle the terminal benefits. The said proposal

was

accepted

by

the

second

respondent-

Commissioner under Annexure-G dated 13.11.2013

and the second respondent directed to