STATE OF KARNATAKA vs CHIDANANDA REDDY S PATIL S/O SANNABASANAGOUDA PATIL

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026
R

CNR: KAHC020153092026


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAAT DHARWAD


TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

PRESENT


THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI


WRIT APPEAL NO.100516 OF 2026 (S-R)


BETWEEN:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560001.

2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
GOVT. OF KARNATAKA,VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SRIKANTH PATIL K., AGA A/W
SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)


AND:

1. CHIDANANDA REDDY S. PATIL
S/O. SANNABASANAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE: 63 YEARS,R/O: VANASHRI,
BARAKOTRI ROAD, DHARWAD – 580007.










Digitally signed
by RAKESH S
HARIHAR
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY,
NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580025,
DIST: DHARWAD,
R/BY ITS REGISTRAR.

3. KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY,
DHARWAD, PAVATE NAGAR,
DHARWAD – 580003,
BY ITS REGISTRAR.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY,ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. SHRIHARSHA A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R3)


THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S. OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.03.2026 IN WRIT PETITION
NO.101423/2025 (S-R) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.


THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
AND
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

The State stands before us calling in question the order of
the learned Single Judge which allows the claim of the writ
petitioner directing grant of pension under the Old Pension
Scheme.

2. Heard the learned Additional Advocate General Sri.
Shrikanth Patil K., alongwith the learned HCGP Smt. Girija S.
Hiremath appearing for the State; the learned counsel Sri. J.S.
Shetty appearing for respondent No.1, the learned counsel Sri.
K.L. Patil appearing for respondent No.2 and the learned
counsel Sri. Shriharsh A. Neelopant appearing for respondent
No.3.


3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts in brief are
as follows:


3.1. The respondent commenced his academic journey
upon being appointed as a Lecturer in Karnatak University,
Dharwad, and entered service on 14-03-1996 . In the course
of his service, by dint of his eligibility, experience and academic

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

progression, he ascended to the higher academic position of
Associate Professor, which he was holding as on 17-07-2013. It
was at this juncture that Karnataka State Law University,
Hubballi, issued a notification inviting applications for
appointment to the post of Professor. The respondent, aspiring
to advance his academic career, submitted his application
through the proper channel, namely, Karnatak University,
Dharwad, his then employer. His candidature was considered,
he emerged successful in the process of selection and was
appointed as Professor in Karnataka State Law University,
Hubballi.


3.2. Consequent upon such selection and appointment,
the respondent tendered his resignation from Karnatak
University, Dharwad, which was treated as a technical
resignation in terms of Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka
Civil Services Rules . He was accordingly relieved from the
services of Karnatak University, Dharwad, and joined Karnataka
State Law University, Hubballi. His pay came to be fixed in
accordance with law, recognizing the service rendered by him
in his previous employment. The respondent continued to

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

discharge his academic responsibilities in the latter University
until he attained the age of superannuation on 31-12-2024 .
Thus came to a close an academic career spanning nearly three
decades, commencing as a Lecturer and culminating as a
Professor, with the respondent having devoted the greater part
of his working life to the service of two Universities.


3.3. It is at the threshold of retirement that the
respondent's travails begin. What ought to have been the
peaceful culmination of a long and distinguished academic
career has instead become the commencement of an avoidable
contest over his pensionary entitlement. The respondent was
denied pension on the premise that the service rendered by
him in Karnatak University, Dharwad, between 1996 and 2013
could not be reckoned for determining his eligibility under the
Old Pension Scheme. The stand of the authorities is that,
notwithstanding his initial entry into service on 14-03-1996 and
his subsequent movement to Karnataka State Law University,
Hubballi, through a technical resignation, he must be brought
within the fold of the New Pension Scheme.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


3.4. Caught in the administrative labyrinth of the
Old Pension Scheme and the New Pension Scheme, the
respondent has been left with neither. While the
authorities remain engaged in determining which pensionary
regime should govern his entitlement, the undeniable reality is
that the respondent, despite having superannuated after
rendering nearly three decades of academic service, has not
been granted pension under either scheme. The contest
between two pensionary regimes has thus produced a rather
incongruous consequence: a Professor who has served two
public Universities for almost three decades is left
without pension altogether. The schemes conceived to
secure financial sustenance in the evening of service have, in
their application to the respondent, become the very reason for
withholding it.


3.5. Confronted with this predicament, the respondent
was constrained to knock at the doors of this Court by
instituting W.P. No.101423 of 2025 . The learned Single
Judge, upon consideration of the controversy, allowed the writ
petition by order dated 17-03-2026 , directing payment of

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

pension to the respondent. It is this order, which sought to
secure pensionary benefits to an academician who had devoted
nearly three decades of his life to University service, that has
driven the State to the appellate jurisdiction of this Court in the
subject appeal.

SUBMISSION OF APPELLANTS:


4. The learned Additional Advocate General, Sri
Shrikant Patil K. , appearing for the appellant/State, would
vehemently contend that the learned Single Judge has fallen
into error in directing grant of pension by reckoning the service
rendered by the respondent in Karnatak University, Dharwad. It
is his emphatic submission that service rendered in an
autonomous institution cannot, as a matter of course, be
imported into the service rendered in another institution for the
purpose of determining pensionary entitlement under the Old
Pension Scheme. He would take this Court through the
documents appended to the appeal to demonstrate that the
respondent, at the time of entering service and subsequently
upon joining Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi, had
accepted the terms and conditions governing his employment,

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

which, according to the learned Additional Advocate General,
disentitled him from claiming the benefits of the Old Pension
Scheme and brought him within the ambit of the New Pension
Scheme.


5. The learned Additional Advocate General would
further submit that the respondent cannot, after having
accepted the conditions governing his appointment, seek to
resile from those conditions upon attaining the age of
superannuation and claim a pensionary regime to which he is
otherwise not entitled. The fact that the respondent initially
entered service in the year 1996, according to the State, would
not, by itself, confer upon him an indefeasible right to pension
under the Old Pension Scheme when the subsequent
appointment was to a different autonomous institution
governed by its own conditions of service. He would, however,
fairly acknowledge that the respondent has not been paid
pension under either scheme , owing to the controversy as
to whether his entitlement falls under the Old Pension Scheme
or the New Pension Scheme.

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


6. Insofar as the resignation tendered by the
respondent from Karnatak University, Dharwad, is concerned,
the learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the
mere nomenclature of a resignation as a technical resignation
would not, by itself, confer upon the employee a right to carry
forward every service benefit attached to his previous
employment. The character of the resignation, according to
him, cannot override the terms and conditions governing the
subsequent appointment, nor can it operate as a passport to
the Old Pension Scheme in the absence of an entitlement
flowing from the applicable rules. A technical resignation, it
is contended, cannot be equated with an automatic
preservation of pensionary rights under the previous
regime. The respondent, therefore, would be entitled only to
the benefits flowing from the New Pension Scheme, and the
State would extend such benefits to him in accordance with
law. On these premises, the learned Additional Advocate
General would seek interference with the order of the learned
Single Judge.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

SUBMISSION OF RESPONDENTS:

7. Per contra , the learned counsel Sri J.S. Shetty ,
appearing for the respondent, would vehemently refute the
submissions advanced on behalf of the State. He would contend
that the entire edifice of the State's argument rests upon an
artificial severance of what is, in law and in fact, a continuous
progression of the respondent's academic career. The
respondent did not abandon his earlier employment to embark
upon an entirely unrelated engagement. He applied for the post
of Professor in Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi,
through the proper channel; his candidature was forwarded by
Karnatak University, Dharwad; and upon his selection, he was
relieved after tendering a technical resignation in terms of Rule
252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules . The
protection accorded to his pay upon joining the latter
University, according to the learned counsel, further
demonstrates that his previous service was not treated as
having been extinguished.


8. The learned counsel would submit that the service
rendered by the respondent in Karnatak University, Dharwad,
from 14-03-1996 till his relief in 2013 , constituting nearly

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

seventeen years of his academic career, cannot be made to
disappear by the mere circumstance of his appointment to
another University. Seventeen years of service cannot
vanish into thin air at the stroke of an administrative
pen, nor can a technical resignation, intended to
facilitate advancement in service, be transformed into an
instrument for forfeiture of accrued service benefits. The
respondent's movement from one University to another was not
a rupture in his academic career, but a progression to a higher
position through a duly recognized process of selection and
appointment.


9. Sri J.S. Shetty would further draw the attention of
this Court to the resolutions passed by the Syndicate, which,
according to him, categorically recognize the respondent's
entitlement to be governed by the Old Pension Scheme. These
resolutions, it is submitted, have attained finality and cannot
now be disregarded by the State to deny the respondent the
benefit of his previous service. The respondent, having entered
service as early as 1996 and having continued in academic
employment until his superannuation on 31-12-2024, is entitled

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

to have the entirety of his qualifying service reckoned for
determination of pension under the Old Pension Scheme.


10. The learned counsel would emphasize that the
respondent seeks not a bounty, but recognition of the
service actually rendered; not an indulgence, but the
pensionary benefit which, according to him, flows from
the governing rules and the resolutions of the competent
University authorities. To exclude the service rendered
between 1996 and 2013 would, he contends, be to obliterate
nearly seventeen years of the respondent's academic life for
the purpose of pension, notwithstanding its recognition for
other service benefits.


11. On these submissions, the learned counsel would
seek dismissal of the appeal and affirmation of the order of the
learned Single Judge, with a consequential direction to the
State to extend to the respondent the pensionary benefits
under the Old Pension Scheme, reckoning the service rendered
by him in both Universities.


12. We have given our anxious consideration to the
submissions made by the respective learned counsel.

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

CONSIDERATION:


13. The afore-narrated facts, the chronology of events
and the successive developments that have culminated in the
present lis are all borne out by the record and brook no
dispute. What, however, merits reiteration, for it lies at the
very heart of the controversy, is the nature, continuity and
character of the service rendered by the respondent .
Admittedly, the respondent entered the portals of Karnatak
University, Dharwad, in the year 1996, upon being selected
through a process of direct recruitment to the post of Lecturer.
His entry into service was thus neither fortuitous nor through
any backdoor arrangement, but the result of a regular process
of selection. With the advent of the University Grants
Commission norms in the year 2009, the nomenclature of the
post of Lecturer underwent a change and came to be
designated as Assistant Professor. The respondent, by virtue of
his eligibility and progression in the academic hierarchy, was
thereafter promoted to the post of Associate Professor.


14. While the respondent was thus serving as Associate
Professor in Karnatak University, Dharwad, an opportunity for

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

further academic advancement presented itself in the form of a
notification issued by Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi,
inviting applications for appointment to the post of Professor in
Law. The respondent, aspiring to ascend to the highest rung of
the regular teaching hierarchy, submitted his application for the
said post, not behind the back of his existing employer,
but through the proper channel, with the knowledge and
involvement of Karnatak University, Dharwad . This
circumstance assumes considerable significance, for the
respondent's movement from one University to another was not
the consequence of an abrupt abandonment of his earlier
employment, but arose from a duly notified recruitment process
undertaken with the participation of his parent institution.


15. The distinction is not merely one of form, but of
substance. The respondent did not seek to sever his academic
past from his professional future; he sought advancement in
the same stream of academic service, from Associate Professor
in one University to Professor in another. Whether such
movement, accompanied by a technical resignation, preserves
the service benefits accrued during his earlier employment is

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

the question that falls for consideration. Nearly seventeen
years of service rendered in Karnatak University,
Dharwad, cannot be treated as a mere historical footnote
in the respondent's service career; its legal
consequences must be determined in the light of the
governing rules and the contemporaneous records. One
such document of significance is the covering letter
accompanying the respondent's application for appointment to
the post of Professor in Karnataka State Law University,
Hubballi. The said communication, which evidences the channel
through which the respondent sought appointment, reads as
follows:
From: Date: 1-6-2013
Chidananda Reddy S. Patil
Associate Professor & Principal
Karnatak University's
Sir Siddappa Kambali Law College
College Road Dharwad-1.

To
The Registrar
Karnatak State Law University
Navanagar Hubli.

Respected Sir,

Sub: Application for the Post of Professor in Law in
the Karnataka State Law University, Hubli.

Ref: Notification no. No: KSLU/BOA(T)/2013-14
Date: 14-05-2013

- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


I am submitting my application for the Post of
Professor in Law in your esteeme University, in the
prescribed form with necessary enclosures in eight sets. A
demand draft for Rs.2000/- bearing no.991274 dated
30-5-2013 drawn on State Bank of Mysore towards
application fees and processing fees is also enclosed.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully
Sd/-
(Chidananda Reddy S.Patil)
Submitted through: The Registrar, Karnataka University,
Dharwad.


16. The respondent gets appointed as a Professor in
Law in the Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi. On his
appointment, he is relieved from Karnatak University, Dharwad.
The relieving order is as follows:
vÀAw: “AiÀÄĤPÀ£ÁðlPÀ” zÀÆgÀªÁtÂ: 0836-2215346
Tel: “UNIKARNATAKA” Phone: 0836-2215349

PÀ£ÁðlPÀ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ
KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY, DHARWAD
¹§âA¢ ºÁUÀÆ DqÀ½vÀ ¸ÀÄzsÁgÀuÁ «¨sÁUÀ
NAAC Accredited 2008, ‘A’
D.P.A.R
Pavate Nagar, Dharwad – 580 003
¥ÀªÁªÀmÉ £ÀUÀgÀ, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ-580003
Karnataka-India
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ - ¨sÁgÀvÀ
__________________________________________________________________________________
SUB: Relief of Dr. C. S. Patil, Associate Professor and
Principal, KUSSK Law College, Dharwad.

REF: 1. Dr. C.S. Patil's letter dated 16.07.2013
2. Vice-Chancellor's Orders dated. 16.07.2013.
__________________________________________________________________________________
OFFICE ORDER KU/DPAR/T/2013/2260 DATE:16 JUL 2013
__________________________________________________________________________________

- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

By the direction of the Vice-Chancellor, the
resignation tendered by Dr. C. S. Patil, Associate
Professor and Principal, K.U.S.S.K. Law College,
Dharwad, is hereby accepted in terms of rule 252 (b) of
KCSR, and he is relieved of his duties with immediate
effect from the University service so as to enable him to
join to the post of Professor in Law, Karnatak State Law
University, Hubli subject to the ratification by the
Syndicate. Further, he is directed to handover the
charge of the Principalship to the next senior most
faculty in the College under intimation to this office.
Further, he is informed to submit required No Due Certificates
to this office so as enable this office to send his service register
and Last Pay Certificate.

Sd/-
REGISTRAR

The relieving order assumes considerable significance in the
unfolding of the controversy. It unequivocally records that the
resignation tendered by the respondent was accepted as one
falling within the ambit of Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka
Civil Services Rules , thereby recognizing its character as a
technical resignation . The respondent was accordingly relieved
from the post held by him in Karnatak University, Dharwad,
accompanied by his Last Pay Certificate, specifically for the
purpose of protection of pay upon his appointment in Karnataka
State Law University, Hubballi. The acceptance of resignation
under the aforesaid Rule and the issuance of the Last Pay
Certificate were thus not empty administrative formalities, but

- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

contemporaneous acts acknowledging the respondent's
previous service and facilitating his transition to the new
institution with protection of his existing pay. Armed with such
relieving order, the respondent joined Karnataka State Law
University, Hubballi, as Professor in Law.

17. The appointment order at the Karnataka State Law
University, Hubballi is as follows:
KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY

NAVANAGAR, HUBLI-580025

PHONE: 0836-2222392FAX: 0836-2223391

REF: 1. Advertisement no. KSLU/BOA(T)/2013-14 dated
14-05-2013.

2. His/Her application dated

3. Proceedings of the Selection Committee dated
14-07-2013.

4. Approval of the 31" Syndicate meeting convened
on 16-07-2013.

5. Vice Chancellor's approval in the office note dtd
16-07-2013 against para no.32
__________________________________________________
OFFICE ORDER NO.KSLU/ADM/BOA(T)-CR8/2013-14 DATED
16.07.2013

On the recommendation of the Board of Appointment
for appointment to the post of Professor constituted under
Section 64 (1) of KSLU Act 2009 and an approval accorded in
st
the 31 Syndicate meeting item no. 21 dated 16-07-2013, DR.
CHIDANANDAREDDY S. PATIL, is appointed to the post of
Professor the Karnataka State Law University's Law School,
Navanagar, Hubli on the pay band of Rs. 37400-67000 with

- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

AGP of Rs. 10,000 plus other allowances admissible under the
prevailing University Rules as amended from time to time.

The appointment is subject to the following terms and
conditions.

1. That he / she will be on probation for a period of two
years if his / her work during the period of probation is
found satisfactory, he/she will be taken on permanent
basis according to the Rules and service conditions of
the University

2. That he / she should be declared physically fit by the
District Medical Officer. A certificate to this effect should
be produced by the candidate within 15 days from the
date of joining to his/her duties.

3. That he/she should execute a bond on a stamp paper of
the value of Rs. 100/-(Rupees Hundred only) containing
the terms and conditions furnished by this office at the
time of joining to his/her duties.

4. That he / she is liable to be transferred to any place
under the jurisdiction of Karnataka State Law University
in the interest of the University service or liable to be
transferred to any other Universities as per the
Provisions of the KSLU Act 2009.

5. He/She may be entrusted with any other University /
College related work in the interest of the University/P.
G. Centre/Constituent Colleges.

6. That in the event of his/her resignation for the post
under the University, he / she shall give at least three
months notice to the University and that in no case
he/she relinquish his/her post unless he/she is allowed
to do so in writing by the Registrar.

7. That he/she has to join the above appointment at
his/her own cost and that no travelling allowance /
daily allowance will be paid for his/her journey
performed for the purpose.

8. That he / she will not be allowed to apply for the
outside post during the period of probation.

9. That he/she will be governed by the service conditions
prescribed by the KSLU Act Statutes, UGC Guidelines
and other provisions as amended or modified from time
to time

- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


10. That he she will not be entitled for pensionery
benefits as per G.O. No. FD (SPL) 04 2005 dated
31-03-2006, and the new fixed contributory
pension scheme shall be compulsory. Further at
the time of joining to the service he/she shall
submit an undertaking to effect that their service
conditions regarding pension benefits are
governed by the G. O. No. FD (SPL) 04 2005 dated
31-03-2006.

11. That he/she should submit Service Book (Bound copies
of Three books) and three passport size photo at the
time of reporting to the duties.

12. This order is subject to the condition that, he / she
should bring police verification certificate within 15
days from the date of joining to his/her duties.

13. In case of candidates belong to SC/ST/OBC (Cat-1,
11A)/ Rural categories "Validity Certificate (
¹AzsÀÄvÀé ¥ÀæªÀiÁt
)" is essential and the same should be produced
¥ÀvÀæ
within 15 days from the date of joining to his/her
duties.

He/She should report to the Registrar, Karnataka State
Law University, Navanagar, Hubli through the Director, KSLU's
Law School, Navanagar, Hubli within fifteen days from the date
of receipt of this order, failing which the appointment order
stands automatically cancelled.
Sd/-
REGISTRAR


18. Clause 10 of the terms and conditions of
appointment, however, introduces a different dimension to the
controversy. The said clause indicates that the respondent
would not be entitled to the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme
and that his appointment would necessarily be governed by the
New Fixed Contributory Pension Scheme. Pursuant to such
appointment, the respondent joined Karnataka State Law

- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

University, Hubballi, as Professor in Law, continued to
discharge his academic responsibilities and ultimately laid down
office upon attaining the age of superannuation on 31-12-
2024 . Thus culminated an academic career spanning nearly
three decades, commencing in the year 1996 as a Lecturer in
Karnatak University, Dharwad, and culminating as a Professor
in Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi.


19. It is at the twilight of his service that the
respondent finds himself enveloped in an administrative
conundrum. The State is now caught in a quandary as to
whether the respondent should be extended the benefit of
pension under the Old Pension Scheme, reckoning the service
rendered by him from the year 1996, or whether Clause 10 of
the subsequent appointment should prevail, bringing him within
the fold of the New Fixed Contributory Pension Scheme. While
the State remains engaged in this exercise of determining the
applicable pensionary regime, the respondent has been left
in a pensionary wilderness, belonging to neither scheme
and receiving the benefit of none.

- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


20. The syndicate of the Karnataka State Law
University, Hubballi on 21.05.2021 foreseeing the problem that
could ensue passed a resolution which reads as follows:
PÀ£ÁðlPÀgÁdå PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ £
£ÀªÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, ºÀħâ½î - 560025
£ÁåPÀ 'J' ±ÉæÃt ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ

:0536-2222392 www.kslu karnataka.gov.in
zÀÆgÀªÁt ¸ÀASÉå eÁ®vÁt:
: 0836-2223392 kslu [email protected]
¥sÁåPÀì E-ªÉÄïï:

¸ÀASÉå: PÀgÁPÁ«/¹D¸ÀÄE/2021-22/0242 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.05.2021

PÀbÉÃjDzÉñÀ

«µÀAiÀÄ: ¥ÉÇæ. ¹. J¸ï ¥Ánïï, PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀgÁdå
PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ±Á¯É, £ÀªÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, ºÀħâ½î EªÀgÀ
¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ ¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£É ¸Ë®¨sÀåzÀrAiÀÄ°è
¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀĪÀPÀÄjvÀÄ.

FD
G¯ÉèÃR: 1. ¢£ÁAPÀ: 12.07.2007gÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀC¢üPÀÈvÀeÁÕ¥À£Á ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀA.
(Spl) 1 PEN
2007
.
. FD (Spl) 209
2 ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.02.20150 ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀA
PEN
2012.
3. PÀ.gÁ.PÁ.J.AiÀÄ 40£Éà ¹ArPÉÃmï ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ PÀ®A ¸ÀASÉå: 23 gÀ
¤tðAiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:30.10.2014.
4. PÀ.gÁ.PÁ.J.AiÀÄ 86£Éà ¹ArPÉÃmï ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ PÀ®A ¸ÀASÉå: 09 gÀ
¤tðAiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:20.03.2021.
5. ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀÄ®¥ÀwUÀ¼À C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.05.2021.

¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É

PÀ£ÁðlPÀgÁdå PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ±Á¯ÉAiÀÄ ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀgÁzÀ
¥ÉÇæ. ¹. J¸ï. ¥Ánïï.. EªÀgÀ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ ¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ°è
, Implementation of NPS w.e.f.
¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀĪÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ
1.04.2006 for new entrants to Government services
.J£ÀÄߪÀ
«µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉG¯ÉèR 1 gÀ°è£À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 12.07.2007gÀ
It is hereby
¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀC¢üPÀÈvÀeÁÕ¥À£Á ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è F ªÀÄÄA¢£ÀAvÉ ºÉüÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. "

- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

clarified that if persons who were already in regular
st
Government service prior to 1 April 2006, apply for posts in
the same or other departments under the State Government
service throught proper channel and on selection they are
relieved by the competent authority or tender technicial
resignation under rule 252 (b) of Karnataka Civil Service Rules
st
and subsequently join the new posts on or after 1 April 2006,
will not be treated as new recruits. Consequently such persons
will not be governed by the new defined contributory pension
scheme. They shall continue to be governed by the pension
benefits under the Karnataka Civil Service Rules"
CAzÀgÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ
21.04.2006 gÀ ¥ÀǪÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°è®zÀÄÝ PÉ.¹.J¸ï ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 252 (©) gÀ°è£À
«¢ü«zsÁ£ÀzÀAvÉPÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀð»¸ÀÄwÛzÀÝ ºÀÄzÉݬÄAzÀ ©qÀÄUÀqɺÉÆA¢ £ÀAvÀgÀ ºÉƸÀ
ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀ £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß ºÉƸÀzÁV £ÉêÀÄPÀUÉÆAqÀªÀgÉAzÀÄ
¥ÀjUÀt¸À¯ÁUÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉAzÀÄ ºÉüÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

Applicability of NPS to the employees of State
£ÀAvÀgÀ.
Autonomous Bodies / Boards / Corporations / Societies /
Universities / State Aided Institutions under various
departments of State Govemment
J £ÀÄߪÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ
G¯ÉèÃR 2 gÀ°è£À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.02.2015gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛïÉAiÀÄ°è PÉ®ªÀÅ ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆaUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ÃrzÀÄÝ. F ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆaUÀ¼ÀÄ NPS £ÀÄß
new recruits
" " CAzÀgÉ ºÉƸÀzÁV £ÉêÀÄPÀUÉÆAqÀªÀjUÉC£Àé¬Ä¸ÀĪÀ §UÉV£À
«µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÁÝVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

F »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 01.04.2006 gÀ ¥ÀǪÀðzÀ°è ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°èzÀÄÝ £ÀAvÀgÀ
ºÉƸÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ £ÉêÀÄPÀªÁzÀ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄzÀ £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ
¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɸÀĪÀPÀÄjvÀÄC£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄPÀ£ÁðlPÀ
«±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, zsÁgÀªÁqÀgÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ §gÉzÀ ¥ÀvÀæPÉÌ ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ
16.10.2019gÀ
¢£ÁAPÀ: ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è "gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¸ÁéAiÀÄvÀÛ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ, ¤UÀªÀÄ
ªÀÄAqÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ, C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄUÀ¼À°è £ÀÆvÀ£À
FD (Spl) 209 PEN
¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£É C¼ÀªÀrPÉUÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀA.
2012
¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.02.2015 gÀ°è ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆaUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛïÉAiÀÄ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ ¥Àj²Ã°¹ CUÀvÀåPÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀAvÉ
w½¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

EAvÀºÀzÉà ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è PÀ£ÁðlPÀ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, zsÁgÀªÁqÀ. ªÉÄʸÀÆgÀÄ
«±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, ªÀÄAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ, gÁtÂZÉ£ÀߪÀÄä
«±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄ»¼Á «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ FUÁUÀ¯Éà G¯ÉèÃR 2 gÀ°è£À
¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.02.2015gÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀC¢üPÀÈvÀeÁÕ¥À£Á ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß DzsÁgÀªÁVj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ
¢£ÁAPÀ: 01.04.2006gÀ ¥ÀǪÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°èzÀÄÝ ¢£ÁAPÀ 01.04.2006gÀ

- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

(OPS)
£ÀAvÀgÀ ºÉƸÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ £ÉêÀÄPÀUÉÆAqÀ £ËPÀgÀjUÉ ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ ¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£É
¸Ë®¨sÀåzÀrAiÀÄ°è ¥ÀjUÀt¹ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ªÉÃvÀ£À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤ªÀÈwÛ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß «¸ÀÛj¹zÀÄÝ
EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

F J®è CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°èG¯ÉèÃRwgÀ°è£À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 30.10.2014
ªÀÄvÀÄÛG¯ÉèÃR 4 gÀ°è£À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 20.01.2021gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹zÀ ¹ArPÉÃmï ¸À¨sÉUÀ¼À
¸ÀzÀj «µÀAiÀÄzÀPÀÄjvÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 01.04.2006gÀ ¥ÀǪÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°èzÀÄÝ,
¢£ÁAPÀ: 01.04.2006gÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ºÉƸÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ £ÉêÀÄPÀUÉÆAqÀ £ËPÀgÀjUÉ ºÀ¼É ¦AZÀUÉ
(OPS)
AiÉÆÃd£É ¸Ë®¨sÀåªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ ¤tðAiÀÄPÉÊUÉÆArgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

¢£ÁAPÀ: 15.06.1989 jAzÀ 17.07.2013gÀªÀgÉUÉ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ «±Àé«zÁå®AiÀÄ,
zsÁgÀªÁqÀzÀ°èG¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄJAzÀÄ ¤AiÀÄ«ÄvÀ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°èzÀÝ ¥ÉÇæ ¹. J¸ï ¥Ánïï..
EªÀgÀÄ PÉ.¹.J¸ï. ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 252 (©) gÀ°è£À «¢ü«zsÁ£ÀzÀAvÉ ¸ÀzÀj ºÀÄzÉݬÄAzÀ
©qÀÄUÀqɺÉÆA¢ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 17.07.2013 gÀAzÀÄ ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀ ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ
£ÉêÀÄPÀUÉÆArgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¢£ÁAPÀ:
21.02.2015gÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀC¢üPÀÈvÀeÁÕ¥À£Á ¥ÀvÀæzÀDzsÁgÀzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀjAiÀĪÀgÀ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß
(OPS)
ºÀ¼É ¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£É ¸Ë®¨sÀåzÀrAiÀÄ°è ¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀĪÀPÀÄjvÀÄ F PɼÀV£ÀAvÉ
DzÉñÀeÁjªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ.
DzÉñÀ

¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹zÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß CªÀ¯ÉÆÃQ¹, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 21.02.2015gÀ
¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀC¢üPÀÈvÀeÁÕ¥À£Á ¥ÀvÀæzÀDzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É G¯ÉèÃR 3 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 4 gÀ°è ¹ArPÉÃmï
¸À¨sÉUÀ¼À ¤tðAiÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀÄ®¥ÀwUÀ¼À C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉAiÀÄ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ ¥ÉÇæ. ¹. J¸ï.
¥Ánïï., PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¥ÁæzsÁå¥ÀPÀgÀÄ, PÀgÁPÁ«AiÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ±Á¯É, £ÀªÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, ºÀħâ½î
(OPS)
EªÀgÀ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¹ArPÉÃmï ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ ¤tðAiÀÄzÀAvÉ ºÀ¼ÉAiÀÄ
¦AZÀtÂAiÉÆÃd£É ¸Ë®¨sÀåzÀrAiÀÄ°è ¥ÀjUÀt¹ DzÉò¸À¯ÁVzÉ.



21. Later, the pension papers of the respondent were
duly forwarded to the State for consideration and sanction of
pensionary benefits. What ought to have followed was the
determination and disbursement of pension in accordance with
the applicable statutory regime. What followed instead was a
refusal, founded upon the specious premise that the service

- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

rendered by the respondent in Karnatak University, Dharwad,
being an autonomous institution, could not be reckoned for the
purpose of continuing him under the Old Pension Scheme. The
State, by adopting such a constricted interpretation of the
governing service rules, has sought to efface nearly seventeen
years of the respondent's earlier service from the reckoning of
his pensionary entitlement. The action of the State is not
merely an erroneous understanding of the governing
provisions; it is an approach which strikes at the very
foundation of continuity of service recognized by the
statutory rules. The denial of pension on such a premise is,
on the face of it, contrary to law and cannot receive the
imprimatur of this Court.


22. The dates and events, though already noticed,
require reiteration, for they constitute the very fulcrum upon
which the controversy turns. The respondent entered the
service of Karnatak University, Dharwad, in the year 1996 ,
through a process of direct recruitment. In the year 2013 ,
while serving as Associate Professor, he secured appointment
as Professor in Law in Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi,

- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

upon applying through the proper channel and with the
permission of his erstwhile employer. Before assuming charge
in the latter University, he tendered his resignation from
Karnatak University, Dharwad. The resignation was neither an
ordinary resignation nor an abandonment of public service. It
was, indisputably, a technical resignation , expressly
recognized and accepted as such by the parent University. The
statutory provision governing a resignation of this character is
Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, which reads
as follows:
“252(b). Resignation of an appointment to take up,
with proper permission, another appointment, whether
permanent or temporary, service in which counts in full
or in part, is not a resignation of public service.”
The language of the Rule is significant, and its import
unmistakable. Where an employee resigns from one
appointment for the purpose of taking up another appointment
with proper permission, and the service in the latter
appointment counts in full or in part, such resignation is not
treated as a resignation from public service. The Rule thus
draws a conscious distinction between resignation simpliciter,
which may bring about a severance of service, and technical

- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

resignation, which facilitates movement from one appointment
to another without necessarily extinguishing the legal
consequences of the service already rendered. It is this
distinction which the State appears to have overlooked
in the case at hand.


23. Rule 252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules
embodies a salutary principle of service jurisprudence. An
employee who, with the permission of his existing employer,
secures another appointment through the proper channel, in
circumstances satisfying the requirements of the Rule, does
not, merely by tendering a technical resignation, forfeit the
continuity of public service recognized thereunder. The Rule is
intended to facilitate legitimate advancement in public
employment, not to penalize an employee for aspiring to a
higher position. A technical resignation is a bridge
between two appointments; it is not, by its very nature,
a guillotine intended to sever every benefit flowing from
the service rendered before it.


24. In the case at hand, the respondent applied for
appointment to the post of Professor in Law in Karnataka State

- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

Law University, Hubballi, through Karnatak University,
Dharwad. His resignation was accepted expressly under Rule
252(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules. He was relieved
with his Last Pay Certificate for the purpose of protection of
pay. The contemporaneous order of Karnatak University,
Dharwad, therefore, recognizes the character of the resignation
and accords protection to the respondent's pay upon his
movement to the latter University. The resolution of Karnataka
State Law University, Hubballi, likewise recognizes such
protection.


25. These are not isolated administrative acts devoid of
legal significance. They form an unbroken chain of
contemporaneous recognition of the respondent's previous
employment and its relevance to his subsequent appointment.
The Universities having adopted the Karnataka Civil Services
Rules to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the
governing University enactments and statutes, Rule 252(b)
would operate in the circumstances of the present case. Both
institutions answer the description of State within the meaning
of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The respondent's
movement from one to the other, through a duly recognized

- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

process of selection and technical resignation, cannot be
treated as though his previous service had been obliterated.


26. The State cannot recognize the respondent's
earlier service for the purpose of protecting his pay and,
without a legally sustainable distinction, refuse even to
reckon that very service while determining his
pensionary entitlement. The applicability of the governing
pension rules must be considered in the light of the legal
character of the respondent's resignation and the continuity of
service recognized by the competent authorities. To disregard
these circumstances would be to render the protection
contemplated under Rule 252(b) illusory.

27. The respondent has rendered, in the
aggregate, 28 years of academic service , commencing as
a Lecturer, progressing through the positions of
Assistant Professor and Associate Professor, and
ultimately serving as Professor in Law. These 28 years
are not years of casual engagement or intermittent
employment. They represent the greater part of the
respondent's professional life, spent in the pursuit of

- 30 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

teaching, scholarship and the advancement of legal
education in two Universities. Yet, after the culmination
of such service, the respondent finds himself compelled
to litigate for the most fundamental of retiral
entitlements — pension.


28. For the last 24 months , as projected, the
respondent has been left without pension, not because he has
failed to render the requisite service, but because the State has
proceeded upon an erroneous interpretation of the governing
provisions. Twenty-eight years of service stand on one
side of the scales, and an administrative misreading of
the law on the other. The latter cannot be permitted to
outweigh the former.


29. The law cannot permit an employee's past
service to be acknowledged when it benefits the
administration, yet disowned when it becomes the
foundation of his pensionary claim. The respondent's
rights, founded upon his entry into service long before
the introduction of the New Pension Scheme and
preserved by the applicable service rules, cannot be

- 31 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

defeated by treating his subsequent appointment as an
event that extinguished his earlier service. The
inevitable conclusion, therefore, is that the respondent is
entitled to have his pensionary benefits determined
under the Old Pension Scheme and not the New Pension
Scheme, reckoning the qualifying service rendered by
him in both Universities in accordance with law.


30. The submission of the learned Additional Advocate
General that Condition No.10 of the subsequent appointment
disentitles the respondent from claiming pension under the Old
Pension Scheme is noticed only to be rejected. The argument
proceeds on the premise that, having accepted the terms and
conditions of appointment, the respondent must be held bound
by the stipulation bringing him within the New Fixed
Contributory Pension Scheme. Such a submission overlooks a
fundamental principle of law: there can be no estoppel
against a statute.


31. Pensionary entitlement, where conferred and
regulated by statutory provisions, is not a matter of contractual
charity or administrative indulgence. It is a right governed by

- 32 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

law. A condition incorporated in an appointment order cannot
override the governing statutory rules, nor can the acceptance
of such a condition operate as a surrender of a statutory
entitlement. What the statute preserves, a contractual
stipulation cannot extinguish; what the law confers, an
administrative condition cannot take away. If Condition
No.10 is inconsistent with the pensionary rights flowing from
the applicable statutory framework, the condition must yield to
the law, and not the law to the condition. Statutory rights are
not commodities to be bartered away at the threshold of
employment.


32. For the aforesaid reasons, the challenge laid by the
State to the order of the learned Single Judge must fail. The
respondent is entitled to pension under the Old Pension
Scheme, reckoning his qualifying service in accordance with
law, with effect from the date following his superannuation on
31-12-2024 , together with all consequential retiral and
terminal benefits.


33. The learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ
petition, had directed payment of pension within eight weeks

- 33 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Nearly seven
months have elapsed since the pronouncement of that order.
The only interim protection operating in favour of the State is a
direction not to precipitate the contempt proceedings. Such an
order cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be construed as
an embargo upon the State settling the pensionary benefits of
the respondent.


34. An order restraining precipitative steps in contempt
proceedings is not an order authorizing continued deprivation of
pension. Nothing prevented the State from complying with the
directions of the learned Single Judge or, at the very least,
from taking steps to determine and settle the respondent's
pensionary entitlement in accordance with law. Yet, the State
has chosen to remain unmoved. The consequence is that the
respondent, notwithstanding a judicial declaration in his favour,
continues to be deprived of pension.


35. The State must realize that litigation is not an end
in itself. The right to prefer an appeal cannot be converted into
an instrument for indefinitely postponing the fruits of a judicial

- 34 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

determination, particularly when those fruits constitute the
means of sustenance of a retired employee. The passage of
time in matters of pension is not an inconsequential
circumstance. Every month of delay is a month during
which an employee, who has already completed his
service, is deprived of the financial security intended for
his retirement.


36. The withholding of pension, in the circumstances of
the case, is attributable to the erroneous interpretation placed
by the State upon the governing service rules. The respondent
cannot be made to bear the financial consequences of such an
error. Pension is intended to provide sustenance after
retirement, and its delayed payment necessarily deprives the
retired employee of the use and benefit of money lawfully due
to him.


37. The State cannot retain what is due to a
pensioner, deprive him of its use for months together,
and thereafter seek to discharge its obligation by paying
only the principal amount. The deprivation of money over

- 35 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

time carries its own consequence. Interest, in such
circumstances, is not a windfall or an undeserved enrichment.
It is recompense for the period during which the respondent
was kept out of the money to which he was entitled.


38. The respondent, therefore, becomes entitled to
interest at 6% per annum on the pensionary amounts
withheld, calculated from the respective dates on which they
fell due until the dates of actual payment.


39. In the light of the foregoing analysis, the
appeal preferred by the State deserves to be dismissed
and the order of the learned Single Judge affirmed. The
respondent shall be entitled to pension under the Old
Pension Scheme, together with all consequential
pensionary and terminal benefits, reckoning his
qualifying service in accordance with law. The arrears
shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the respective
dates on which they fell due until actual payment.

- 36 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026


40. The period of eight weeks granted by the learned
Single Judge for compliance is, by way of a final indulgence,
extended by a further eight weeks from today . The State
shall ensure that the pensionary benefits, together with arrears
and interest as directed hereinabove, are determined and
disbursed within the said period.


41. It is made clear that, in the event the State fails to
comply with these directions within the extended period of
eight weeks, the respondent shall become entitled to interest
at 12% per annum on the outstanding pensionary
amounts, from the respective dates on which they fell
due until actual payment , apart from litigation costs
quantified at ₹1,00,000/- , payable by the State to the
respondent.


42. The State must understand that pension is not
a bounty or a favour to be dispensed at its convenience,
but a lawful entitlement to be honoured when it falls
due. A retired employee cannot be compelled to spend
the evening of his life in the corridors of litigation,

- 37 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16936-DB
WA No. 100516 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020153092026

seeking what ought to have reached him as a matter of
course.

Ordered accordingly.


Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE


Sd/-
(HEMA KULKARNI)
JUDGE
RSH/CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22