L.R. PATIL versus GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA

L.R. PATIL versus GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA

The relieving order dated 08.04.1993 under Rule 252(b) cannot be treated as resignation; because the appellant was not substantively appointed/confirmed or permanently absorbed in the new post and remained a probationer subject to pending litigation, his lien on the previous post of Office Superintendent continued under Rule 20 Note 4, entitling him notionally to seniority, consequential promotions and pensionary/service benefits.

Parties
Appellant: L.R. PATIL; Respondent: GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (civil Appeal No. 3254 of 2013) / Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Lien, Resignation, Probation, Seniority, Pensionary Benefits, Karnataka Civil Service Rules
Service Law Administrative Law Lien Resignation Probation Seniority Pensionary Benefits Karnataka Civil Service Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.R. PATIL

Appellant

GULBARGA UNIVERSITY, GULBARGA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (civil Appeal No. 3254 of 2013) / Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether order passed pursuant to Rule 252(b) KCS Rules relieving the appellant to accept another appointment ought to be treated as an order accepting resignation
  2. 2 Whether on joining the new post the appellant's lien on the original/previous post continues to be maintained until permanently absorbed in the new department/cadre
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is entitled to restoration of seniority, consequential promotions and pensionary/service benefits at par with his juniors

Ratio Decidendi

The relieving order dated 08.04.1993 under Rule 252(b) cannot be treated as resignation; because the appellant was not substantively appointed/confirmed or permanently absorbed in the new post and remained a probationer subject to pending litigation, his lien on the previous post of Office Superintendent continued under Rule 20 Note 4, entitling him notionally to seniority, consequential promotions and pensionary/service benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned order dated 23.10.2009 in Writ Appeal No. 10003 of 2009 set aside
  • Order dated 27.08.2008 passed by the Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 4066 of 2006 restored subject to modifications