Karnataka High CourtEmployment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

49 Aided-School Employees’ Pre-Grant Service To Count For Pension, Not State Salary Arrears: Karnataka HC

SRI. MUTTU VARADHA RAJANv.STATE OF KARNATAKA

49 Aided-School Employees’ Pre-Grant Service To Count For Pension, Not State Salary Arrears: Karnataka HC. SRI. MUTTU VARADHA RAJAN vs STATE  OF KARNATAKA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether service rendered before a post’s admission to grant-in-aid must be reckoned for notional pay fixation and consequential benefits, including pensionary benefits.

The court held

The petition was allowed and disposed of.

It also directed

Respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 6 were directed to reckon the petitioners’ service from their respective appointment dates, including pre-grant service, for notional pay fixation and calculation of pension and other service benefits.

The authorities were directed to complete that consideration within six months; the relief did not include pre-grant salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State.

01Facts

The petitioners, teaching and non-teaching employees of aided educational institutions, sought recognition of their service from their initial appointment dates, including service rendered before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid, for pay fixation and consequential service benefits.

pp. 19–20 · ¶ 3–5

They relied on the Karnataka High Court’s judgment in W.A. No. 2476 of 2015 and connected matters, dated 24 July 2026, and had submitted representations to the authorities.

pp. 19–20 · ¶ 3–5

The State submitted that the relief available was governed by paragraph 61 of that appellate judgment.

p. 21 · ¶ 7

02Issues

i.1. Whether service rendered before a post’s admission to grant-in-aid must be reckoned for notional pay fixation and consequential benefits, including pensionary benefits.

pp. 19–21 · ¶ 3–5, 7–8

ii.2. Whether the petitioners were entitled to salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the pre-grant period.

p. 22 · ¶ 8

03Law Applied

The Court applied the clarification in paragraph 61 of the judgment in W.A. No. 2476 of 2015 and connected matters, which confined the issue to recognition of non-grant service for pay fixation and consequential service benefits.

p. 22 · ¶ 8

Under that rule, the service rendered before admission of a post to grant-in-aid is to be counted for notional pay fixation as at the date of admission and for consequential benefits, including pension; however, the State is not liable for salary arrears or other monetary benefits for the pre-grant period.

p. 22 · ¶ 8

The Court also noted that Annexure I to the Rules, 1999 places responsibility for salary and other benefits until grant-in-aid admission on the institution’s management.

p. 22 · ¶ 8

04Reasoning

The Court treated paragraph 61 of the appellate judgment as governing the petitioners’ claims.

pp. 21–23 · ¶ 7–9

Because that judgment recognised pre-grant service for notional fixation and consequential benefits, the petitioners could receive those benefits on the same basis.

pp. 21–23 · ¶ 7–9

But the distinction drawn in paragraph 61 between service recognition and payment liability meant that the State could not be required to pay pre-grant salary arrears.

pp. 21–23 · ¶ 7–9

The Court accordingly directed the specified respondents to reckon service from the petitioners’ appointment dates for notional pay fixation and calculation of pension and other service benefits.

pp. 21–23 · ¶ 7–9

05Holding

The petition was allowed and disposed of.

pp. 22–23 · ¶ 8–9

Respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 6 were directed to reckon the petitioners’ service from their respective appointment dates, including pre-grant service, for notional pay fixation and calculation of pension and other service benefits.

pp. 22–23 · ¶ 8–9

The authorities were directed to complete that consideration within six months; the relief did not include pre-grant salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State.

pp. 22–23 · ¶ 8–9
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI. MUTTU VARADHA RAJANvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High Court · November 05, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment