SRINIVASAMURTHY K. S. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are teaching and non -teaching staffs and employees of private aided educational institutions. According to the petitioners, their appointments were approved by respondent No. 1. While approving the appointment, a condition having been imposed that the past service rendered from the date of appointment till the appointee was admitted for salary grant will be counted only for the purpose of leave and pension and thereby denied the notional annual increments, these writ petitions were filed on 30.01.2014, to direct the respondents to reckon and count the past service rendered by the petitioners from the date of their initial appointment up to the date of approval of their appointment with aid respectively for the purpose of fixation of pay scale, seniority, increments, including TBA, pensionary benefits and other consequential service benefits.

(2.) SRI R. Padmanabha, learned advocate for the petitioners contended that the writ petitions filed by some of the teachers working in different institutions, seeking to reckon their services from the date of their initial appointments up to the date of approval for the purpose of fixation of pay scale, seniority and all other benefits having allowed and the writ appeals and the Special Leave Petitions filed by the Government having been dismissed, as is evident from Annexures -Z17 to Z22, the respondents have an obligation to extend the same benefits to the petitioners. He submitted that, since the respondent No. 1 has not extended the said benefits to the petitioners, there is violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE petitioners have not made a demand with the respondents seeking to perform the legal duty. Annexure -Z16 is a legal notice and not a representation. Submission of Sri R. Padmanabha, to treat Annexure -Z16 as a representation made by the petitioners cannot be accepted. The demand must be in writing by the petitioners with all service particulars, so that the authority can secure the relevant records and take decision in the matter. Since the petitioners have not made the demand with the respondents by furnishing the full service particulars, with regard to the claims made in these writ petitions, petitions for issue of writ of mandamus cannot be entertained.