01Facts
The petitioners, teaching and non-teaching employees of aided educational institutions, sought to have service rendered from their initial appointment—including service before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid—reckoned for pay fixation, increments, seniority, pension and other service benefits.
¶ 3–5They relied on the Karnataka High Court Division Bench judgment in W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters, dated 24 July 2026, and sought consideration of their representations.
¶ 3–5The State submitted that the relief was governed by the clarification in paragraph 61 of that judgment.
¶ 702Issues
i.Whether service rendered before a post’s admission to grant-in-aid must be reckoned for notional pay fixation and consequential pensionary and other service benefits
¶ 3–5, 8ii.Whether employees are entitled to salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the pre-grant period
¶ 803Law Applied
The Court applied the Division Bench’s clarification in paragraph 61 of its judgment in W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters, dated 24 July 2026.
¶ 8Under that clarification, pre-grant service is to be counted for notional pay fixation as at the date the post is admitted to grant-in-aid and for consequential benefits, including pension and other service benefits; it does not create a right to claim salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the pre-grant period.
¶ 8Annexure-I to the Rules, 1999 places responsibility for salary and other benefits during that period on the institution’s management.
¶ 804Reasoning
The petitioners’ claims fell within the scope of the Division Bench’s ruling because they sought recognition of service rendered before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid.
¶ 7–9The Court adopted the limitation set out in paragraph 61: that service could be reckoned for notional pay fixation and consequential benefits, but not to impose on the State liability for pre-grant salary arrears.
¶ 7–9It therefore directed the authorities to reckon the petitioners’ service from their respective appointment dates for the permitted purposes.
¶ 7–905Holding
The petition was allowed.
¶ 8–9Respondent No. 1 was directed to take account of the petitioners’ service from their respective appointment dates, including pre-grant service, for notional pay fixation and calculation of pension and other service benefits.
¶ 8–9The consideration was to be completed within six months; the order did not grant State-paid salary arrears for the pre-grant period.
¶ 8–9Original Court PDF
SRI. DEVASI TvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
