Allowed

Sri. Devarayappa v. the Divisional Controller

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2019WP/104827/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed writ petitions filed by a bus conductor against the Karnataka Road Transport Corporation. Despite inordinate delay, the court directed the respondent to grant service benefits, arrears of salary from May 1, 2005, and consequential reliefs.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to grant continuity of service, back wages, and increments from 01.05.2005 and disburse arrears within two months with 8% interest for delay.

Sri. Devarayappa Vs the Divisional Controller — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NOs. 104827-104828 OF 2016 (L-KSRTC)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

SRI. DEVARAYAPPA S/O BASAPPA DANAGOND AGE:54 YEARS OCC. CONDUCTOR R/O VAKKALATANA ONI SAVADATTI-591126

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT. BHAGYASHREE N BIKKANNAVAR, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION DHARWAD DIVISION DHARWAD DISTRICT

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI.SHIVAKUMAR S BADAWADAGI, ADV.)

¶15

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (I) CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN ID.NO.440/2003 DATED:01.01.2005 ON THE FILE OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, HUBBALLI AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER

¶16

¶17

DATED:01.01.2005, PASSED BY THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, HUBBALLI, PORUDCED AT ANNEXURE-D, IN SO FAR HOLDING THAT THE PETITIONER IS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY OTHER RELIEF, AS THE SAME BEING NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. II. QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSMENT ISSUED BY RESPONDENT CORPORATION DATED:27.12.214 (SIGNED ON DATED:20.12.2014) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND ISSUE DIRECTIONS TO THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION TO GRANT THE RELIEF OF CONTINUITY OF SERVICE, BACK WAGES, INCREMENTS AND OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEFS WHICH PETITIONER WAS RIGHTLY ENTITLED FROM THE DATE OF ORDER OF COMPULSORY RETIREMENT.

¶18

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

In the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

¶21

a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order in the like nature quashing the impugned order dated 01.01.2005 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Hubballi.

¶22

¶23

b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other

¶24

writ or order in the like nature quashing endorsement issued by the respondent

¶25

corporation dated 27.12.2014.

¶26

Undisputedly, there is an inordinate delay and

¶27

latches on the part of the petitioner in questioning the validity of the order dated 01.01.2005 passed in I.D.No.440/2003 in W.P.No.25302/2005 and suffered an order on 24.10.2007. Further the respondent preferred the writ appeal, wherein also suffered an order. Consequently, award has been implemented on 31.03.2010. In this backdrop, the respondent is hereby directed to extend all the service benefits to the petitioner with effect from 30 days from the date of the award, if it is not disbursed, in other words petitioner is entitled to arrears of salary with effect from 01.05.2005 till reinstatement. If the same has not been calculated and disbursed, the respondent is hereby directed to calculate

¶28

¶29

and disburse the amount within a period of two months from today failing which the petitioner is entitled to interest on such arrears of amount at the rate of 8%.

¶30

Accordingly, the writ petitions stand dispose off.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Vb/-

Sri. Devarayappa v. the Divisional Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Devarayappa v. the Divisional Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Obalaraju Vs State of Karnataka by

Smt Pooja C Sarangamath Vs the Registrar

Ravi S/O Basappa Ganiger Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Deepa W/O. Devappa Khanagaonkar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Somappa Siddappa Ajankatti Vs the Secretary to

Smt. Aruna W/O R.M.B. Nagaraj Vs the State of Karnataka