The Karnataka High Court rejected a writ petition for non-payment of interest on backwages, holding that the petitioner must approach the appropriate authority to enforce implementation rather than seeking a writ.
Petitioner directed to work out remedy in accordance with law for non-payment of interest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS
WRIT PETITION No. 80809/2012 (L-KSRTC)
BETWEEN :
ABDUL RASHEED S/O. MD. ISMAIL AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS OCC. NIL R/O.No.3062 ROZA GULBARGA – 585 104. … PETITIONER
(BY Sri. LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADV.) AND : --------
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER NEKRTC GULBARGA DEPOT No.1, GULBARGA 585 104 REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. … RESPONDENT (BY Sri. SHIVAYOGIMATH ASSOCIATES, ADVS.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY THE INTEREST AMOUNT TO THE PETITIONER AS PER THE ORDER DATED 18.08.2010 AND ETC.
2
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING
O R D E R
The labour Court vide award dated 17.09.2009 in KID No. 82/2002
set aside the order of dismissal of petitioner from service, directed reinstatement with full backwages. Further this Court in W.P. No. 81756/2010 vide order dated 18.08.2010 modified the award directing 50% backwages with 6% interest. This order in W.P. No. 81756/2010 is confirmed by a Division Bench in W.A. No. 10220/2010. In compliance of the award and the order of this Court the petitioner is now reinstated and 50% backwages is paid. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to non-payment of 6% interest on backwages. If that is so the petitioner has to work out his remedy in accordance with law to enforce that part of the award which is not implemented. Therefore no writ of mandamus as prayed for by the petitioner can be issued. It is open for the petitioner to work out his remedy in accordance with law.
off.
Sd/JUDGE.
LRS.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued for non-payment of interest on backwages when the petitioner has an available remedy to enforce the implementation of the award.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abdul Rasheed
The Divisional Controller NEKRTC Gulbarga
N.H. Nagamohan Das
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
