Partly allowed

Balappa S/O Basappa Meti v. the Nekrtc through Its Managing Director Anr.

Karnataka HC7 Aug 2012WP/82339/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partly allowed a writ petition challenging a Labour Court award dismissing a petitioner driver's claim for reinstatement. Ruling that the termination was void for lack of Section 33(2)(b) approval, the court directed reinstatement with continuity of service but without backwages, pending an apex question.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Corporation directed to reinstate petitioner into service with continuity and consequential benefits without backwages on or before 14.09.2012.

Balappa S/O Basappa Meti Vs the Nekrtc… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

¶4

DATED THIS THE 07^th DAY OF AUGUST, 2012

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

¶7

WP NO 82339 OF 2012(L-KSRTC)

¶8

BETWEEN

¶9

BALAPPA, S/O BASAPPA METI AGE 43 YRS, OCC. NIL R/O PLOT NO.22,

¶10

JANAKI DEVI NIVAS, OPP. DIST COURT COMPLEX, NAVARASPUR COLONY BAGALKOT ROAD, BIJAPUR. ... PETITIONER

¶11

(By Sri : P VILASKUMAR, ADV.)

¶12

AND

¶13

THE NEKRTC THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SARIGE SADANA

¶14

MAIN ROAD, GULBARGA – 585 102.

¶15

THE NEKRTC THROUGH ITS DIVSIONAL CONTROLLER HOSPET DIVISION HOSPET – 589 001. ... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(NOTICE ISSUED TO R-1 & 2 AND SERVICE AWAITED)

¶17

¶18

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, HUBL IN KID NO. 101/2011 ON ISSUE NO.1 DATED 21.12.2011 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 23.01.2012 in KID No. 101/2011 passed by the labour Court at Hubli rejecting the claim petition.

¶22

Petitioner was a driver-cum-conductor in the respondent

¶23

Corporation. For misconduct articles of charges were issued enquiry was held and on 28.06.2011 the petitioner was dismissed from service. Aggrieved by this order of dismissal the petitioner raised a dispute before the labour Court under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short `the Act') in KID No. 101/2011. On contest the labour Court passed the impugned award dismissing the claim petition. Hence, this writ petition.

¶24

¶25

It is not in dispute that in I.D. No. 148/2005 pending on the file of the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, the Charter of Demands raised by the KSRTC Staff and Workers Federation is pending. Petitioner herein is a concerned workman. The action of the respondent Corporation in having not sought approval of termination of the petitioner from service by filing an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act is void and inoperative in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in the case of Jaipur Jilla Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Vs. Sri. Ram Gopal Sharma, AIR 2002 SC 643. This Court in identical circumstances in W.P. No. 60395/2012 vide order dated 13.07.2012 directed reinstatement and other benefits.

¶26

Learned counsel for petitioner workman submits that the petitioner would give up the full backwages if reinstated into service with consequential benefits and continuity of service within a time frame.

¶27

Learned counsel for the respondent Corporation submits

¶28

that the issue relating to Section 33(2)(b) of the Act is pending

¶29

¶30

before a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1159/2012 and

¶31

connected matters.

¶32

In the circumstances the following;

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

i. Writ petition is partly allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 23.01.2012 in KID No. 101/2011 passed by the labour Court at Hubli is hereby modified directing the respondent Corporation to reinstate the petitioner workman into service with continuity of service and consequential benefits and without backwages on or before 14.09.2012.

¶35

iii. This order is subject to the final outcome in W.A. No. 1159/2012 and connected matters.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

LRS.

Balappa S/O Basappa Meti v. the Nekrtc through Its Managing Director Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balappa S/O Basappa Meti v. the Nekrtc through Its Managing Director Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri a M Biradar Vs the Union of India

Vijaya Kumar Hagargundi S/O Siddramappa Vs the Asst. Executive Engineer Anr.

Shivanand Chavan S/O Manappa Vs Smt. Sharada W/O Shivanand Chavan

Divisional Controller Vs Afsarpasha S/O Appasaheb Jahagidar

Jagadevi W/O Ramanna Sunka, Vs State of Kar, by Prl Secretary, Rural Development

Mallappa S/O Sanganbasappa Barker Vs the Divisional Controller Nekrtc