Title: L.R PATIL V GULBARGA UNIVERSITY
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3254 OF 2013
Dated on: 4.9.2023
Coram: HON’BLE JUSTICE JK MAHESWARI & JUSTICE K.V VISHWANATHAN
Facts of the case
The present case L.R. Patil, a former employee of Gulbarga University, filed a civil appeal challenging the validity of his removal from the position of Assistant Registrar and seeking the restoration of his seniority and service benefits.
Issues before court
(i)whether the order relieving the appellant to take up another appointment as Assistant Registrar was a resignation?
(ii)whether the appellant had a lien on his previous post of Office Superintendent?
(iii)whether he was entitled to any relief in terms of seniority, promotion and pension?
Court analysis and Judgement
On September 4th 2023 in a judgement written by Justice JK Maheswari of the Supreme Court granted the appeal and upheld the learned Single Judge’s decision that the appellant had a lien on his previous appointment and was entitled to service and pensionary benefits on par with his juniors. The court hearing petitioners’ arguments claiming claims that he did not resign from his prior position, but was relieved to accept another job as Assistant Registrar at the same university with proper approval, in accordance with Rule 252(b) of KCS Rules and an Office Memorandum dated 22.01.1972.
The court recorded that according to the petitioner, he retained his lien on his old post until he was permanently absorbed in the new post, as per KCS Rule 20 Note 4. He says that he was never confirmed or incorporated into the new post since his appointment was invalidated by the High Court and he was retained in his prior position.
The petitioner claims that he is entitled to all service benefits, including seniority, consequential promotions, and pensionary benefits on par with his Juniors who were promoted to the post of Assistant Registrar during the pendency of litigation.
The Supreme Court evaluated the relevant articles of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules and the Office Memorandum dated 22.01.1972, and applied the accepted law on the notion of lien as established by the Court’s precedents.
Justice JK Maheswari also made a note that the appellant was never fully absorbed or confirmed in the new position of Assistant Registrar, hence his lien on the prior position of Office Superintendent was safeguarded and continued under Rule 20 Note 4 of the KCS Rules. The Court also rejected the respondent-University’s position that the appellant’s relieving order should be viewed as resignation in terms of the regulations.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh
Click here to view the judgement
