Pre-grant service counts for notional pay fixation and consequential benefits, without salary arrears.

The petitioners, associate professors employed by the fourth respondent institution, initially sought to challenge the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulation of Pay, Pension and Other Benefits) Act, 2014.

At the hearing, they submitted that the petition could be disposed of with a direction to consider their service benefits in light of paragraph 61 of the judgment in W.A. No. 2476 of 2015 and connected matters.

The State submitted that the relief was governed by that paragraph.

Whether the petitioners’ service rendered before their posts were admitted to grant-in-aid must be reckoned for pay fixation and consequential service benefits.

Whether the petitioners are entitled to salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for the pre-grant-in-aid period.

The Court applied paragraph 61 of the judgment in W.A. No. 2476 of 2015 and connected matters, dated 24 July 2026, concerning the effect of the Karnataka Private Aided Educational Institutions Employees (Regulation of Pay, Pension and Other Benefits) Act, 2014 and Annexure-I to the Rules, 1999.

Under that rule, the management remains responsible for salary and benefits until a post is admitted to grant-in-aid; pre-grant service is to be considered for notional pay fixation from the date of admission to grant-in-aid and for consequential benefits, including pension, but does not entitle an employee to claim salary arrears or other monetary benefits from the State for that earlier period.

The petitioners limited the relief sought to consideration of their service benefits under paragraph 61 of the appellate judgment, and the State accepted that the relief was governed by that paragraph.

Applying its terms, the Court directed that the petitioners’ pre-grant-in-aid service be reckoned for the specified notional fixation and consequential benefits, while the State’s liability for salary or other monetary benefits for the non-grant period was excluded.

Respondents 2 and 3 were directed to reckon the petitioners’ service from their respective dates of appointment, including the pre-grant-in-aid period, for benefits consistent with paragraph 61 of the judgment in W.A. No. 2476 of 2015.

The respondents were directed to complete their consideration and pass appropriate orders within six months.