01Facts
The petitioners, teachers employed in aided educational institutions, sought recognition of service rendered from their respective initial appointment dates, including service before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid. They requested that this service be considered for pay fixation, increments, seniority, pensionary and other consequential benefits, relying on the judgment in W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters, and sought consideration of their representation dated 14 August 2026.
¶ 3–5 · pp. 3–5The State submitted that the relief was governed by paragraph 61 of the appellate judgment.
¶ 7 · p. 502Issues
i.Whether service rendered before a post’s admission to grant-in-aid must be reckoned for notional pay fixation and consequential service benefits.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–4 · ¶ 8 · p. 6ii.Whether the petitioners were entitled to a direction requiring the respondents to consider their representation and extend the benefits flowing from the appellate judgment.
¶ 3(b) · p. 403Law Applied
Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution provide the basis for the Court’s writ jurisdiction.
p. 3The Court applied the principle stated in paragraph 61 of the judgment in W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters: service during the non-grant period is to be counted for notional pay fixation as of the date the post is admitted to grant-in-aid and for consequential benefits, including pension and other service benefits; however, the State is not liable for salary arrears or other monetary benefits for the pre-grant period.
¶ 8 · pp. 6–7Under Annexure-I to the Rules, 1999, the institution’s management remains responsible for salary and other benefits until the post is admitted to grant-in-aid.
¶ 8 · pp. 6–704Reasoning
The Court treated paragraph 61 of the appellate judgment as determining the scope of the petitioners’ entitlement.
¶ 8–9 · p. 7Applying that rule, it directed the authorities to reckon the petitioners’ pre-grant service from their respective appointment dates for notional pay fixation and the calculation of pension and other service benefits.
¶ 8–9 · p. 7The direction did not extend to payment by the State of salary arrears for the non-grant period.
¶ 8–9 · p. 705Holding
The petition was allowed and disposed of.
¶ 9 · p. 7Respondent No. 2 was directed to take account of the petitioners’ service from their appointment dates, including pre-grant service, for notional pay fixation and calculation of pension and other service benefits, and to complete the consideration within six months.
¶ 9 · p. 7Original Court PDF
SRI. MAHADEVASWAMYvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
