Govindaraju v. The University of Agricultural Science

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9841 OF 2021 (S-RES) BETWEEN:

¶1GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS S/O SUBRAMNAYAM NAIDU B S P AND N.S.P GKVK BANGLAORE 560065.

¶2K RAJAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O KENCHEGOWDA Z.A.R.S, U.A.S V.C. FARM MANDYA 571405.

¶3THIMME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O PAPEGOWDA Z.A.R.S, U.A.C. V C FARM MANDYA-571405.

¶4LAKSHMEGOWDA V AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O ULLAPPA SERICULTURE COLLEGE, UAS, KURBOOR BENGALURU CHINTHAMANI ROAD CHINTAMANI, KOLAR-563125.

¶5GANGADHARAPPA K AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O KAMBAIAH #203, DODDABETTAHALLI LAYOUT V R PURA POST, BANGLAORE-97.

Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA NC:(2026:KHC:7880( WP(No.(9841(of(2021( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

6., JAGADEESHA,R, AGED,ABOUT,54,YEARS, S/O,RUDRACHAR, DRY,LAND,AGRICULTURE,PROJECT,UAS,,GKVK, BANGALORE,560065., ,

7., PRAKASH,S, S/O,SHIVAPPA, AGED,ABOUT,55,YEARS, KUNDRU,POST,,KUNDRU, HONNALI,(TQ),,DAVANAGERE-577001., ,

8., RAMACHANDRAIAH,K, AGED,ABOUT,62,YEARS, S/O,KARIYAPPA, #6/4,,4TH,CROSS,,SAPTHAGIRI,LAYOUT, NEAR,BESCOM,OFFICE, V,R,PURA,,BANGALORE-560097., ,

9., G,S,SUBRAMANYA, AGED,ABOUT,55,YEARS, S/O,SHANKAR,NARAYANA,SHASTRY, OFFICE,OF,THE,DIRECTOR,OF,RESEARCH,,UAS,,GKVK, BANGALORE-65., ,

10., MUNAWAR,PASHA, AGED,ABOUT,55,YEARS, S/O,ABDUL,LATHIEF,S,K, SR.,FARM,SUPERINTENDENT,OFFICE, ZARS,,GKVK,,BANGALORE-65., ,

11., SHESHADRI,SHETTY, AGED,ABOUT,64,YEARS, S/O,SANJEEV,SHETY, KUNDURU,POST,,KUNDRU, HONNALI,(TQ),,DAVANAGERE-577001., ,

12., KALACHARY,P,S, AGED,ABOUT,65,YEARS, S/O,LATE,SHANKARACHARY, R/A,NO.5,,SRI,MYLARALINGESWARA,NILAYA, NC:(2026:KHC:7880( WP(No.(9841(of(2021( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( RATHNAKARA,NAGAR,,MATHODU,CROSS, SAVALANGA,ROAD,SHIMOGA-577204., ,

13., SANNEGOUDA,G, S/O,LATE,RUDRAPPA, AGED,ABOUT,61,YEARS, FIELD,ASSESSMENT, SOIL,SCIENCE,AND,AGRICULTURAL,COLLEGE, GKVK,,BENGALURU-560065, …PETITIONERS, (BY,SMT.,SIRI,RAJASHEKAR,,ADVOCATE,), AND:(

1., THE,UNIVERSITY,OF,AGRICULTURAL,SCIENCE, REP.,BY,ITS,REGISTRAR, GKVK,CAMPUS,,BANGALORE-560065., ,

2., THE,UNIVERSITY,OF,AGRICULTURAL,SCIENCES, REP.,BY,ITS,ADMINISTRATIVE,OFFICERS, GKVK,CAMPUS,,BANGALORE-560065., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SACHIN,B,S.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R1,&,R2), , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, DECLARE, THAT, THE, PETITIONERS, ARE, ENTITLED, FOR, PAYMENT,OF,ARREARS,OF,WAGES,AT,THE,RATES,NATIONALLY, FIXED, ORDERS, PASSED, BY, THE, R2,, DATED, 25.04.2011, ANNEXURE-E, FOR, THE, PERIODS, INDICATED, IN, THE, TABLE, HEREIN,BELOW,AS,AGAINST,EACH,ONE,OF,THE,PETITIONERS, AND,FURTHER,ISSUE,A,WRIT,IN,THE,NATURE,OF,MANDAMUS, DIRECTING, THE, RESPONDENT-UNIVERSITY, TO, DISBURSE, SUCH,ARREARS,OF,PAY,WITHIN,A,TIME,TO,BE,STIPULATED,AS, THIS,HONBLE,COURT,DEEMS,FIT,TOGETHER,WITH,COSTS,OF, THIS,WRIT,PETITION., , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,PRELIMINARY,HEARING, IN, 'B', GROUP,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER, WAS, MADE, THEREIN, AS, UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,H.T.,NARENDRA,PRASAD,

ORAL ORDER

¶1In this writ petition, the petitioners sought for the following relief/s: "DECLARE that the petitioners are entitled for payment of arrears of wages at the rates notionally fixed orders passed by the 2nd respondents, dated.25.04.2011 Vide No.AO/Eat-IV/RJ/Step up/2011-12 Annexure-E for the periods indicated in the table herein below as against each one of the petitioners and further issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent-University to disburse such arrears of pay within a time to be stipulated as this Hon'ble court deems fit together with costs of this Writ petition, in the ends of justice and equity."

¶2The case of the petitioners is that they were employed on a daily wage basis in the respondent-University. The University, by order dated 09.11.1995, regularized all 115 employees to Group 'D' posts. After such regularization, 84 employees submitted a request to the University seeking regularization of their services to

Group 'C' cadre posts. The University, by its order, directed the absorption of the said 84 employees into Group 'C' cadre posts in accordance with the pay scale applicable to the respective posts. The remaining 31 employees, who were denied absorption into Group 'C' posts, they filed writ petitions before this Court in W.P.Nos.42857-87/1999, seeking a direction to consider their cases for absorption into the posts of Group 'C' cadre. The said writ petitions were allowed, and directions were issued to the University to consider the cases of the petitioners therein in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Board of Regents, in its meeting, constituted a Committee to examine the question of absorption of all the employees into Group 'C' posts and to suggest the pay scales to be granted. Based on the recommendations of the Committee, the Board of Regents, in its meeting, resolved that similar benefits and arrears of

emoluments, as extended to the said 84 employees, should also be extended to the petitioners, among others. But monetary benefits were extended from the date of entry into the service. Being aggrieved by the said resolution of the Board, the petitioners filed W.P.Nos.9767-9781/2004 and connected matters.

¶3This Court, by order dated 28.02.2005 disposed of W.P.Nos.9767-9781/2004 and connected matters by directing the respondents to grant pay scales applicable to the posts to which the petitioners were absorbed, with effect from 09.11.1995, on par with the other 84 employees. The operative portion of the order is extracted below: "There are eight posts in the Group 'C' cadre as per Cadre and Recruitment Rules of the University. 8 posts have different pay scales. The proposal of the University to group 115 employees as a one distinct category in Group 'C' and to give them a lowest of the pay scales other than the one prescribed to the post is an untenable stand. The said proposition is blatantly contrary to the constitutional mandate of

equal work and equal pay. Besides it would also impinge the Service Rules. It is imperative on the part of the University to grant the pay scales applicable to the post to which they are absorbed. In respect of 31 employees, they also should be absorbed to the posts in Group 'C' cadre suitable to their qualification and to be granted the pay scales applicable to the post to which they are absorbed w.e.f. 9-11-1995 on par with 84 employees."

¶4Subsequently, several representations were submitted to regularize into Group 'C' posts. Later, respondent No. 2, by endorsement dated 14.08.2006, absorbed the 31 employees from the cadre of Group 'D' to Group 'C' and further stated that the said absorbed employees were entitled to notional pay fixation from the date of their absorption and financial benefits from the date of reporting for duty in the respective posts, since they had not worked against Group 'C' posts earlier. The said endorsement was challenged before this Court in W.P.Nos.6708/2009 and 7121-35/2009. By order

dated 22.04.2010, this Court directed the respondents to reconsider the claim of the petitioners for extension of certain benefits, including postings, in terms of the judgment passed in W.P.Nos.9767-9781/2004 and connected matters. The petitioners, being aggrieved by the non-extension of the benefits in terms of the judgments of this Court, are before this Court.

¶5Even this Court, by order dated 22.04.2010 in W.P.Nos.6708/2009 and 7121-35/2009, in paragraph No. 4, has held in paragraph No.4 as follows:: "4. During the pendency of these writ petitions the grievance Committee of the respondent -University recommended to the Board of Regents to reconsider the claim of petitioners. Thereafter the Administrative Officer also by considering recommendations of the grievance Committee directed to place the grievance of the petitioners for extension of benefits before the Board. In the circumstances the respondents are hereby directed to reconsider the claim of petitioners for extension of certain benefits including postings in terms of the judgment dated 28.02.2005 in W.P. No. 9767-

9781/2004 and connected matters without being influenced by its order at Annexure F dated

14.08.2006. Further petitioners are at liberty to give fresh representation with all the details and connected documents to the Board for reconsideration of their claim. In such an event, the Board shall consider the same in accordance with law keeping in view the directions issued by this Court in the judgment referred to above."

¶6In spite of the specific directions of this Court, financial benefits have not been granted to the petitioners from 09.11.1995. In view of the directions issued by this Court in the above writ petitions, the above writ petition is required to be allowed.

¶7Accordingly, following order is passed: a) The writ petition is allowed. b) Respondent No.2 is directed to pay arrears of wages to the petitioners in terms of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.Nos.9767-9781/2004 and connected matters, dispose of on 28.02.2005.

c) All these processes shall be completed within six months from date of receipt of copy of this order. In view of disposal of the main petition, all pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

HA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 27