Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1414 (KAR)

B. D. Kantharaja v. State Of Karnataka

2020-07-15

M.I.ARUN

body2020
JUDGMENT M.I.Arun, J. - The matter is taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned counsels for the parties. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Physical Culture Instructor on a temporary basis in the 2nd respondent University on 06.01.1996. His services were continued on a temporary basis and the same was regularized and made permanent on 01.08.2006. The petitioner is having a degree in Master of Physical Education from the 2nd respondent University itself. As per the regulations of the university, the petitioner is supposed to retire at the age of 60 years. 3. As per the Government order dated 15.10.2009, the 1st respondent State has enhanced the age of superannuation of teaching community of universities drawing UGC Scales from the existing 60 years to 62 years. However, in respect of other teaching community the age of superannuation continues to be 60 years only. 4. The 2nd respondent University on 15.09.2011 has passed a statute wherein, the nomenclature of the post of Physical Culture Instructor in the Department of Physical Education is changed to that of Assistant Director of Physical Education. Regarding the applicability of the statute it is stated as mentioned hereunder. "2) Applicability: a) These Statues shall be applicable to only such of those Physical culture Instructors who possess minimum qualification of a Post Graduate Diploma or Certificate or a Degree in Physical Education and who are in the 1986 UGC Pay Scales and who are subsequently recruited with the minimum qualification prescribed by UGC from time to time. b) From the date on which these statutes come in to force the nomenclature of the post of physical culture instructors shall stand ceased and henceforth it will be called as Asst. Director of Physical Education." 5. Similarly, regarding sanctioning the benefit of UGC pay scale, the 2nd respondent University has passed a statute making the same applicable to Physical Culture Instructors and it reads as mentioned hereunder:- "2) Applicability: a) These Statues shall be applicable to only such of those Physical culture Instructors who possess minimum qualification of a Post Graduate Diploma or Certificate or a Degree in Physical Education and who are in the 1986 UGC Pay Scales. b) Who may be subsequently recruited with the minimum qualification prescribed by the UGC from time to time." 6. b) Who may be subsequently recruited with the minimum qualification prescribed by the UGC from time to time." 6. Based on the aforementioned amended statute, the petitioner made a representation to the 2nd respondent University wherein, he has sought for extension of UGC pay scale and also to change the nomenclature of the post held by him of Physical Culture Instructor to Assistant Director of Physical Education. The 2nd respondent University by its order dated 09.01.2017 has rejected the request made by the petitioner. However, the said order does not state in detail as to why his request has been rejected. 7. Challenging the impugned order dated 09.01.2017 of the 2nd respondent University, the petitioner has filed writ petition wherein, he has sought a writ of certiorari to set aside the said order dated 09.01.2017. He has further prayed for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to extend him the benefit of UGC pay scale which is prescribed for Assistant Director of Physical Education from the date of appointment till superannuation and also to extend his age of superannuation to 62 years in accordance with Government order dated 15.10.2009. 8. The 2nd respondent University has contended that firstly, the Government order dated 15.10.2009 is applicable to teachers and petitioner is not a teacher as per the provisions of Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000. It is further contended that even presuming he is a teacher, he is not drawing UGC pay scale and hence, the Government Order dated 15.10.2009 is not applicable to him. It is also contended that he has not brought out all the facts in his representation as to how the statutes of the university changing the nomenclature of Physical Culture Instructor to Assistant Director of Physical Education is applicable to him and how he is entitled to UGC pay scales. 9. It is noticed from the representations made by the petitioner that he has not stated in detail as to how he is entitled to a change in nomenclature from Physical Culture Instructor to Assistant Director of Physical Education and why he should be admitted to UGC pay scale from the date of his appointment till today. Further, it is also noticed that the petitioner has never sought for extending his age of superannuation from the university from 60 years to 62 years in any of his representations. Further, it is also noticed that the petitioner has never sought for extending his age of superannuation from the university from 60 years to 62 years in any of his representations. However, it is also noticed that the order dated 09.01.2017 passed by the 2nd respondent University does not assign any reason as to why the request of the petitioner for applicability of UGC pay scale and change in nomenclature of his position was rejected. 10. During the course of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he prays for grant of permission to make a fresh representation to the university detailing as to how the petitioner is entitled to change in nomenclature of the post held by him from that of Physical Culture Instructor to Assistant Director of Physical Education and as to how he is entitled to UGC pay scales and also as to why his age of superannuation should be 62 years and not 60 years. 11. For the said request, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent agreed to consider any such representation made by the petitioner. Hence, the following:- ORDER The petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation to the 2nd respondent University detailing as to why he is entitled to a change in nomenclature to the post of Physical Culture Instructor held by him as Assistant Director of Physical Education; why he should be granted UGC pay scale and as to why his age of superannuation should be increased to 62 years from 60 years. The 2nd respondent University is hereby directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, if any, made by him within 3 weeks from the date of such representation and pass a reasoned order. If the 2nd respondent university were to conclude that petitioner is entitled for the reliefs sought by him, but if the petitioner were to attain the age of 60 years by then, it shall not be a ground to deny him the benefits. No order as to costs.