SRI. ASHWATHA N vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 5022 OF 2022 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. ASHWATHA N.,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
S/O. NANJAIAH,
WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE,
OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
(E AND I), BANGALORE DIVISION (NORTH),
NEW PUBLIC BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
K. R. CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
R/AT NO. 459,
BINNY NEW LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 023.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S. B., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by AASEEFA
PARVEEN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL.
CHIEF SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
2ND FLOOR, BMTC A BLOCK,
SHANTHINAGAR,
K H ROAD,
BANGLORE - 560 027.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.C. DESHMUKH, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 03/12/2021 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN
APPLICATION NO. 5900/2019 AT ANNEXURE-D AND
CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION NO.5900/2019,
UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
and
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
Petitioner, unsuccessful applicant before the Tribunal
is before this Court questioning order dated 03.12.2021 in
Application No.5900/2019, whereunder the petitioner's
request to quash endorsement dated 26.07.2019
(Annexure-A13) and for a consequent direction to re-fix
basic pay in the Revised Pay Rules, 2018 on his

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
appointment as First Division Assistant in the second
respondent Department is rejected.
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the
petitioner was appointed as Second Division Assistant in
the High Court of Karnataka by order dated 26.03.2001.
While he was working as Second Division Assistant in the
High Court of Karnataka, in the year 2004, Notification
was issued by the Karnataka Public Service Commission
inviting application to fill up the post of First Division
Assistant. The petitioner is said to have participated in the
selection process and he was selected and appointed as
First Division Assistant by order dated 28.12.2006 in the
second respondent Excise Department. It is submitted that
the petitioner submitted his resignation to the post of SDA
in the High Court of Karnataka and his resignation was
accepted under Rule 252(b) of KCSRs. Thereafter, he is
said to have reported to duty in the second respondent
department on 08.01.2007. It is also pointed out that

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
under Annexure-A7 dated 01.10.2009, his past service
rendered in the High Court of Karnataka was counted
under Rule 224A of KCSRs. It is submitted that the
petitioner submitted representation seeking pay protection
in terms of Rule 41-A of KCSRs. The said representation
was considered and rejected under Annexure-A13 dated
26.07.2019 as well as Annexure-A14 dated 05.09.2019
holding that the petitioner was not a Government servant
before reporting to duty as First Division Assistant in the
second respondent Excise Department and he was only an
employee of the High Court of Karnataka which cannot be
considered as service department. Questioning the said
endorsement, the petitioner was before the Tribunal and
the Tribunal under impugned order rejected the
petitioner's prayer observing that there is no provision
under KCSRs, to grant pay protection to a person
resigning under Rule 252(b) of KCSRs. or from civil posts
and Military Personnel of the rank of JCO or below
discharged from the military before superannuation and

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
appointed to civil posts or civil service in accordance with
the rules of recruitment. Questioning the said order of the
Tribunal as well as endorsements, the petitioner is before
this Court in this writ petition.
3. Heard learned counsel Sri.S.B.Mukkannappa,
for petitioner, learned AGA Sri.S.C.Deshmukh, for
respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would
contend that the petitioner resigned from the post of SDA
at High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru and joined as FDA
in second respondent department in pursuance to
Annexure-A2, order of appointment dated 28.12.2006 in
the pay scale of (3850 to 7050). Learned counsel would
further submit that the petitioner's resignation was
accepted under Rule 252(b) of KCSRs. It is his submission
that when resignation is accepted under Rule 252(b) of
KCSRs., it would not amount to resignation from public
service and it would be continuation of service. Learned

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
counsel would further submit that in terms of Rule 41-A of
KCSRs., the petitioner would be entitled for pay protection
since the petitioner had joined service from High Court to
the State Government. Further, learned counsel would
submit that the pay revision had taken place in the High
Court of Karnataka and in terms of 2018 revision of pay,
the scale of pay of SDA in the High Court had become
equivalent to the pay scale of FDA in the second
respondent department. Learned counsel would also place
reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
Comptroller and Auditor General of India and Others Vs.
Farid Sattar reported in (2000) 4 SCC 13 in support of his
above contention. Thus, he would pray for allowing the
writ petition.
5. On the other hand learned AGA would support
the order passed by the Tribunal and would further submit
that the petitioner was appointed as FDA in the pay scale
of (3850 to 7050), whereas he was drawing Pay in the

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
post of Second Division Assistant in the scale of Rs.3,375/-
. Thus, he would submit that the petitioner was not
appointed to equivalent or having equivalent pay scale.
Thus, he submits that under Rule 41-A of KCSRs. he would
not be entitled for pay protection. Thus, he would pray for
dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are
not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed
by the Tribunal for the following reasons:
7. While dismissing the writ petitioner's application
by impugned order, the Tribunal has observed that there
are no rules in KCSRs. applicable to persons appointed to
civil services and to civil posts under the Government, to
provide pay protection to employees coming from other
public service, such as the High Court that may have its
own pay rules for its staff. Whether the service of staff in
the High Court could be equated with the public service or

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
their function can be accepted as discharging duties in the
affairs of the State could be considered in appropriate
proceedings and we need not venture into giving any
finding on the said issue.
8. The petitioner admittedly was working as
Second Division Assistant in the High Court of Karnataka
in a pay scale beginning at Rs.3,375/-. While the
petitioner was working as SDA in the High Court of
Karnataka, he was appointed as First Division Assistant in
the second respondent Department of State by order
dated 28.12.2006 in the pay scale of (3850 to 7050). The
petitioner is appointed to a higher pay scale.
9. No doubt the petitioner's resignation was
accepted under Rule 252(b) of KCSRs. Rule 252(b) of
KCSRs. gives continuation of service, though resignation is
accepted, since filing of application for appointment is with
the permission of the employer. Be that as it may. Rule
41-A of KCSRs. reads as follows:

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
"41A- Notwithstanding anything contained in rules 20
and 41 of these rules 2 [or anything contained in the
Recruitment rules in respect of particular services but subject
to the Karnataka Civil Services (Direct Recruitment to Class
III Posts) (Special) Rules, 1970] when a Government servant
appointed to a post or category of posts as a local candidates
or as regularly recruited candidate, is appointed regularly as
per relevant rules of recruitment to any other posts or
category of posts, whether in the same or any other
department, whether a period of probation is prescribed or
not his pay is regulated as follows:
(i) Where the appointment is to a post the scale of pay
of which is lower than the scale of pay of the post he held
last, his pay in his appointment shall be equivalent to the
stage of pay which he would have reached had he been
appointed to that scale of pay from the date he was initially
appointed as a local candidate or as a regularly recruited
candidate as the case may be;
(ii) Where the appointment is to a post the scale of pay
of which is identical with the scale of pay of the post which he
held last, his pay in his appointment shall be fixed at the
stage which is equal to the pay drawn in the post last held by
him.
Provided that after the initial pay is fixed under clause
(i) or clause (ii), as the case may be, the next increment in
the scale of pay of the new post shall be granted on the date
on which an increment in the time-scale of the old post would
have accrued, had he continued in that post or the date on
which an increment accrues in the timescale of the new post,
whichever is earlier].
[Note- The personal pay granted under Rule 8(f) of the
Karnataka Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1970 shall
continue even after the pay is fixed under this clause and
shall be absorbed in the next increment.]
[(iii) xxx]
(iv) If the minimum pay of the new post is higher than
that fixed under the preceding clauses, that pay shall be
allowed.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
(v) The increment or increments falling due during the
period of probation in cases of fixation done under clause (i)
or (ii) above shall be governed by the provisions of the Note
below rule 10 of the Karnataka Government Servants
(Probation) Rules, 1957.
(vi) When the probationer is declared to have
satisfactorily completed the period of probation after an
extended period of probation and the increments falling due
during the extended period of probation have not been
allowed under the Note below rule 10 of the Karnataka
Government Servants (Probation) Rules, 1957, his pay from
the date of satisfactory completion of probation shall be
refixed at what he would have drawn had he completed the
probation at the end of the prescribed period of probation and
his future increments shall be allowed on the normal dates.
Instructions: (i) The benefit derivable under this rule shall
also be given to appointments made regularly as per relevant
rules of recruitment on or after the first day of April 1962.
(ii) Cases which have been decided already under rule 42- A
shall not be reopened if refixation of pay under these rules is
disadvantageous to the Government servant.
(iii) The provisions of the Karnataka Probationers (Pay) Rules,
shall not apply to those whose pay is to be regulated under
rule 41-A.]"
10. In terms of the above Rule, pay protection
could be provided to a Government Servant who is
appointed regularly as per relevant rules of recruitment to
any other post or category of posts, whether in the same
or any other department, if the appointment is to a post,
the scale of pay which is lower than the scale of pay of the

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
post he held last, his pay in his appointment shall be
equivalent to the stage of pay which he would have
reached had he been appointed to the scale of pay from
the date he was initially appointed. The next circumstance
is, where the appointment is to a post, the scale of pay
which is identical with the scale of pay of post which he
held last, his pay in his appointment shall be fixed at the
stage which is equal to the pay drawn in the post held by
him.
Petitioner's prayer before the Tribunal was on
quashing of the endorsement dated 26.07.2013
(Annexure-A13), to re-fix his basic pay under the Revised
Pay Rules, 2018. When the petitioner has joined as FDA in
the year 2007, he cannot seek fixation of his pay in the
Revised Pay Rules, 2018. The petitioner could seek fixation
of his pay as on the date of his appointment in the
equivalent pay scale. The petitioner cannot seek benefit of
subsequently revised pay, for his appointment many years
prior to revision of pay.

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58012-DB
WP No. 5022 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010104902022
11. The petitioner had placed reliance on the
decision of Farid Sattar (Supra) . The same would have no
application to the facts of the present case. In the above
Farid Sattar's case, the employee was working in the pay
scale of (1400 - 2600) drawing pay of Rs.2,040/-.
However, he was transferred to a lower pay scale of (1200
- 2040) and in that circumstances, the Hon'ble Apex Court
directed to maintain the pay drawn by the petitioner
therein at Rs.2,040/- even in the lower scale. However, in
the instant case, the petitioner was working as SDA in a
lower pay scale and who was appointed to FDA to a higher
pay scale. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that
there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the
writ petition stands rejected.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
AP
CT:TSM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14