Facts
The petitioners, employees or former employees of aided educational institutions, sought consideration of their representation dated 28 August 2026 for service benefits, including recognition of service rendered before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid.
Source reference: pp. 6–7, para. 2They relied on the decisions in W.P. No. 21216/2014 and W.A. No. 2467/2015, W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters.
Source reference: pp. 6–7, para. 2The State submitted that the applicable scope of relief was clarified in paragraph 61 of the Division Bench’s order dated 24 July 2026.
Source reference: p. 7, paras. 3–5Issues
1. Whether the petitioners’ pre-grant-in-aid service must be reckoned for pay fixation and consequential service benefits.
Source reference: pp. 7–9, paras. 5–62. Whether the petitioners could claim salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the pre-grant-in-aid period.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 6Law Applied
The Court applied the clarification in paragraph 61 of the Division Bench’s order in W.A. No. 2476/2015 and connected matters.
Source reference: pp. 8–9, para. 6Under that clarification, service rendered before admission of a post to grant-in-aid is to be counted for notional pay fixation from the date of admission to grant-in-aid and for consequential benefits, including pension and other service benefits; it does not create an entitlement to salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the non-grant period.
Source reference: pp. 8–9, para. 6The Division Bench relied on Annexure I to the Rules, 1999, under which the management is liable for salary and other benefits until the post is admitted to grant-in-aid.
Source reference: pp. 8–9, para. 6Reasoning
The Court treated paragraph 61 of the Division Bench’s order as governing the petitioners’ claim.
Source reference: pp. 9–10, paras. 6–8It therefore directed that their service be reckoned from their respective appointment dates, including the pre-grant-in-aid period, but only for the purposes and benefits specified in that paragraph.
Source reference: pp. 9–10, paras. 6–8The direction did not extend to payment by the State of salary arrears or other monetary benefits for the non-grant period.
Source reference: pp. 9–10, paras. 6–8Holding
The petition was allowed and disposed of.
Respondents 1, 2 and 5 were directed to reckon the petitioners’ service from their respective appointment dates, including pre-grant-in-aid service, for benefits flowing from paragraph 61 of the Division Bench’s order.
Source reference: pp. 9–10, paras. 7–9The respondents were directed to complete consideration and pass appropriate orders within six months.
Source reference: pp. 9–10, paras. 7–9Original Court PDF
RENUKAMMA H.R,vsTHE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
