Writ Petition No. 3004 of 2015 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3004 OF 2015 (S-RES) BETWEEN: K. OBAIAH S/O KATAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RETIRED LINEMAN, BESCOM, J.D. EXTENSION, WARD NO.13, JAGALUR TOWN, DAVANAGERE DIST. (BY SRI. M. MADHVACHAR, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER AND: 1. THE DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD BANGALORE-560 009. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER COMMERCIAL, EXECUTION AND OPERATION DIVISION, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, DAVANAGERE-577 002. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER COMMERCIAL, EXECUTION AND OPERATION DIVISION, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, DAVANAGERE-577 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.V.DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.02.2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND PAY THE ALL ARREARS OF SALARY FOR THE Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 PERIOD FROM 26.04.2006 TO 18.11.2010 BY TREATING THE SAID PERIOD AS LEAVE WITH PAY TILL REINSTATEMENT INTO SERVICE 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 R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to consider his representation dated 04.02.2013 and pay the arrears of salary for the period from 26.04.2006 to 18.11.2010 by treating it as on duty. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to pay the arrears of increment from the date of suspension till his retirement and also refix the pension after granting of increment. 2. (i) The petitioner contends that he was working as a lineman at the respondent. He was arrested by Jagalur Police in a criminal case involving the murder of a co-employee. The petitioner was charged for various offences in S.C.No.120/2005. The respondent suspended the petitioner from service on 26.04.2006 by an order dated 01.06.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner was convicted for the offences in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 S.C.No.120/2005. Consequent thereto, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 26.04.2006. (ii) The petitioner claims that he filed Criminal Appeal No.951/2006 against the judgment of conviction passed by the District Court. He claimed that this Court in terms of the judgment dated 03.06.2009 acquitted him of the charges. Thereafter, the petitioner made representations dated 20.07.2009 and 22.10.2009 and requested the respondent No.3 to reinstate him into service. The respondent No.3 reinstated the petitioner into service but did not grant any financial benefits for the period during which he was suspended. (iii) The petitioner attained age of superannuation on 30.09.2013. He filed repeated representations seeking for financial benefits for the period of suspension. However, no action was taken, which compelled him to file W.P.No.35138/2012. The said writ petition was allowed on 21.11.2012 and the respondents were directed to consider the
Legal Reasoning
case of the petitioner on par with the case of Mr.M.S.Basappa. The petitioner contends that even after directions were issued by this Court in writ petition referred supra, the respondents - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 did not consider his request. The petitioner prepared a statement of arrears of benefits that he was entitled to and submitted the same on 04.02.2013. The respondent No.2 in turn addressed a communication dated 20.03.2013 to the respondent No.3 for necessary action on the request of the petitioner. iv) The petitioner contends that the respondents are not taking any action and are not extending the financial benefits to which he is entitled to. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for direction to the respondents to pay the arrears of salary for the period 26.04.2006 to 18.11.2010 and also pay other increments and refix the pension after granting the increments. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was suspended from service in view of his arrest in a criminal case. Thereafter, he was discharged from service in view of his conviction in the criminal case. He contends that the petitioner challenged the same in an appeal and was acquitted. Consequently, the petitioner was reinstated into service. He contends that by virtue of Regulation 85(c) of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees Service Regulations - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 (henceforth referred to as K.E.B. Employees Service Regulations), the petitioner is entitled for full pay and allowances. He submits that during the period of suspension, he was paid 50% of the pay and allowance and in view of acquittal in the criminal case and consequent reinstatement, he is entitled to full pay and allowances. 4. The petition is opposed by the respondents who have filed statement of objections contending inter alia, that this Court in W.P.No.35138/2012 had directed the request of the petitioner to be considered on par with the case of one Mr.M.S.Basappa. It is contended that what was paid to Mr.M.S.Basappa was 50% of salary towards subsistence allowance and that the same reliefs were granted to the petitioner soon after he was suspended from service. It is also contended that the respondent No.2 addressed a communication to the respondent No.3 on 20.03.2013 treating the period of suspension that is from 26.04.2006 to 20.08.2006 and from 21.08.2006 to 18.11.2010, as half pay leave granted a basic salary of Rs.7,625/- and paid 50% of salary as subsistence allowance together with house rent allowances and dearness allowances as per the order dated 14.06.2013 and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 paid a sum of Rs.4,36,499/- which was transferred to the savings bank account of the petitioner. It is therefore contended that the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the respondents have passed an order in exercise of the power conferred under Regulation 85(c) and 85(e) of the K.E.B. Employees Service Regulations. 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. 7. The petitioner was suspended from service on account of his arrest in a criminal case and on his conviction, he was discharged. Later, when the petitioner was acquitted in a criminal appeal by this Court, he was reinstated into service. The petitioner was suspended from the service between 24.06.2006 to 18.11.2010 during this time, he was granted 50% of pay as subsistence allowance. After the petitioner was reinstated into service, the question was whether he was entitled to full pay with allowance. Regulation 85 of the K.E.B - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 Employees Service Regulations deals with the aforesaid situation, which reads as follows: "85. Reinstatement.-(a) When an employee who has been dismissed or removed or compulsorily retired or suspended, is reinstated, or would have been reinstated but for his retirement on superannuation while under sus- pension, the authority competent to order the reinstatement shall consider and make a specific order. (i) regarding the pay and allowances to be paid to the employee for the period of his absence from the duty, or for the period of suspension ending with the date of his retirement on superannuation as the case may be, and (ii) whether or not the said period shall be treated as period spent on duty. (b) When the authority mentioned in sub-regulation (a) is of opinion that the employee has been fully exonerated or in the case of suspension, that it was wholly unjustified, the employee shall be given for the period referred to in clause (i) of that sub-regulation the full pay and allowances to which he would have been entitled had he not been dismissed, removed or retired from service or suspended, as the case may be. Notes: 1. Special pay and compensatory allowance like Conveyance Allowance which an employee was in receipt on the date previous to the date of dismissal, removal, retirement or suspension being payable for the performance of specific - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 duties the same shall not be payable for the period. 2. Where an employee who is not considered for promotion on account of his being under suspension is fully exonerated on conclusion of the Departmental Enquiry Court proceedings if any, may be promoted in the next available vacancy, or if there is no vacancy, by reversing the officiating arrangement made previously. His pay on the date of actual promotion may be fixed at a stage which he would have reached had he been promoted on the date his junior was promoted and took charge. (c) In other cases, the employee shall be given for the period intervening the date of dismissal, removal or retirement from service and the date of reinstatement, or for the period of suspension, such proportion of the full pay and allowances the Competent Authority may prescribe. Note: If the Competent Authority does not prescribe the proportion of pay and allowances payable, the employee is entitled to draw during the period only the subsistance allowance admissible under the Regulations: Provided that the payment of allowances under clause (b) or clause (c) shall be subject to all other conditions under which such allowances are admissible. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 Provided further that such proportion of such pay and allowances; shall not be less than the subsistance and other allowances admissible under Regulation 84. (d) In a case falling under clause (b) the period of absence from duty shall be treated as a period spent on duty for all purposes. (e) In a case falling under clause (c) the period of absence from duty shall not be treated as a period spent on duty unless the Competent Authority specifically directs that it shall be so treated for any specified purpose: Provided that if the employee so desires, such authority may direct that the period of absence from duty shall be converted into leave of any kind due and admissible to the employee. Note: The order of the Competent Authority regarding the treatment of the period of absence from duty passed under this proviso is absolute and no higher sanction would be necessary for the grant of extraordinary leave." 8. A perusal of Regulation 85 (c) shows that it is an exception to Regulations 85(a) and 85(b). In Regulation 85(b), if an employee has been fully exonerated or in the event of suspension being found to be wholly unjustified, the employee shall be given, for the period referred to in clause (i) of 85(a), - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015 the full pay and allowance to which he would have been entitled had he not been dismissed, removed or retired from service as suspended, as the case may be. It is only in cases where an employee was dismissed and later reinstated into service, the competent authority may prescribe the portion of pay and allowances that an employee is entitled to. As stated above, the petitioner was not dismissed or removed from service but was discharged, in view of the criminal case where he was convicted. Therefore, the Regulation 85(c) did not apply to the case but 85(b) was clearly applicable. Rule 85(b) specifically provides that if the case falls under 85(b), then the period of absence from duty shall be treated as a period spent on duty for all purposes. 9. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to the full pay and allowance during the period of service. It is needless to mention that the petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits, which includes increments and other allowances that the petitioner was entitled to, if he was in service. 10. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed: - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:12556 WP No. 3004 of 2015
Decision
ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) Respondent No.3 is directed to pay full pay and allowances for the period 26.04.2006 to 18.11.2010 by treating the period as on duty, subject however to deduction of subsistence allowance paid during the said period. iii) Respondent No.3 shall also ensure that the petitioner is granted all increment from the date of suspension till his retirement and refix his pension in accordance with law. This shall be complied with in a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv) In order to ensure compliance of the above direction, list this petition on 01.07.2025. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35