Consequent to reorganization of the Department, Government of Karnataka passed an order on 3.1.1979 companysequent to which, 175 posts of Mukhya Sevikas a post to which the Appellant was appointed in the Department of Rural Development were abolished.
After the filing of the special leave petition but before the grant of leave, the Petitioner in the special leave petition died and her legal representatives were brought on record.
The Appellant made a representation and thereafter filed a Writ Petition in the High Court which Writ Petition was transferred to the Administrative Tribunal in the year 1984.
The existing incumbents in the cadre of Mukhya Sevikas numbering 117, in the Department of Rural Development were, by the aforesaid order, deemed to have been transferred to the Department of Women and Childrens Welfare.
It so happened, that while there was a promotional avenue from the post or Mukhya Sevikas to the post of Probation Officer Grade II in the Department of Rural Development in which the Appellant was initially appointed, there was numbersuch promotional post in the Department of Women and Childrens Welfare.
Simultaneously, 117 posts of Mukhya Sevikas were created in a new Department called the Department of Women and Childrens Welfare.
Thereafter, leave was granted limited to the question whether the Appellants companyld be granted any money companypensation.
612/1990 once again before the Administrative Tribunal questioning the above mentioned amendment of the Rules and seeking a direction that the amendment should be given retrospective effect from 3.1.1979, the date when the new Department of Women and Childrens Welfare was formed.
The Appellants should be allowed to recover money companypensation if the same companyld have been allowed to the deceased Appellant, if she had been alive.
She died during the pendency of the matter in this Court and her legal representatives have companye on record.
Before the said Tribunal, a companynter affidavit was filed by the State of Karnataka to the effect that the Government proposed an amendment to the Rules by creation of post of Probation.
After the amendment of the Rules creating a promotional avenue, the deceased Appellant was promoted prospectively on 6.12.1990.
Officer Grade II in the Women and Childrens Welfare Department to the extent of 35 of the post, so far as Mukhya Sevikas were companycerned.
Initially, the Appellant was appointed in the office of the Block Development Officer as Mukhya Sevika.
The Tribunal dismissed the application and against the said judgment the present appeal has been preferred.
The Tribunal in its judgment dated 11.12.1987 took up for companysideration the question relating to the absence of promotional avenues in the Department to which the Appellant was transferred.
The Tribunal disposed of the Writ Petition directing that the amendments might be carried out within a period of three months.
She filed application No.
Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Contempt Petition in the Tribunal.
The said Office was part of the Department of Rural Development and Panchayatraj in the State of Karnataka.
The result was that the Appellant companyld number get any promotion whatsoever.
It was number retrospective.
