STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Vs. DR. K.S. KIRAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of the Tribunal dated 21/4/2011 passed in Application No. 6163/2010 is called in question in this writ petition, by which the Tribunal has declared that the respondent is entitled to the benefit of Rule -6A of the Karnataka Government Servants' (Seniority) Rules, 1957 and the same shall be given by the Government without undue delay. The records reveal that the respondent was appointed as general duty Medical Officer by the State Government on 24.8.2002. Prior to his appointment, he was working as a Medical Officer in Armed Forces. After his appointment on 24.8.2002, he was required to join duty within 15 days. However the respondent made an application for extension of time for joining on 3.9.2002, which was allowed and he was granted time for joining up to 15.10.2002. One more application came to be filed by the respondent on 11.10.2002 seeking extension of time to join duty. Considering the application on merits, the State Government has granted time to the respondent to join duty up to 31.12.2002. The respondent reported to duty on 30.12.2002 i.e., within the extended period. The petitioner thereafter prayed that his past services in Armed Forces shall be reckoned for the purpose of seniority in the State cadre. Such prayer is rejected by the State Government by virtue of the order dated 26.6.2009. The order dated 26.6.2009 is called in question by the respondent before the KAT in Application No. 6163/2010, which came to be allowed by the impugned order.

(2.) AS per Rule 6A of the KGS (seniority) Rules, the appointment of an Officer of the Defence Services to any equivalent class or grade of service in the State Civil Services shall not be treated as first appointment to that class or grade of service for purpose of seniority and the seniority of an officer appointed shall be determined with reference to his first appointment to the class or grade of service or services to which he belonged prior to the appointment. Hence it is amply clear that the length of service of the respondent in Armed Forces has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of seniority in State Civil Services. 'The appointment of the respondent was by way of direct recruitment pursuant to the notification issued by the State Government inviting applications to the post of Medical Officer. The respondent being the Medical Officer working in Armed Forces during the relevant time submitted an application for being appointed through the proper channel i.e. Armed Forces and he was selected and appointed on merits by the State. Therefore respondent is entitled to the benefit flowing from Rule -6A of KGS (seniority) Rules. Merely because the respondent was granted extension of time to report for duty by the State Government, such time spent during the extension cannot be treated as break in service. Rule 18(2) of the KCS (General Recruitment) Rules makes amply clear that the Appointing Authority may, on the application of the candidate (respondent herein) and if satisfied that there are good and sufficient reasons for doing so, by order in writing, grant such further time as it may deem necessary. Thus the prescribed period of 15 days as prescribed under sub -rule (1) of Rule -18 of the KCS (General Recruitment) Rules can be further extended by the State Government based on the fact situation. In the matter on hand, the period for reporting to duty is extended by the State Government as per law taking into consideration the hardship suffered by the respondent. Therefore the period of extension granted by the State Government cannot be treated as break in service. In view of the above, the Tribunal is justified in directing the State Government to take into account the past service of the respondent in the Indian Army as Medical Officer, for the purpose of seniority in the State cadre. Hence no interference is called for. Petition fails and the same stands dismissed.