Allowed

Sri. Somappa Siddappa Ajankatti v. the Secretary to

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2019WP/107563/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to quash a Labour Court award granting meager compensation to a plantation watchman whose services were dispensed due to a criminal case. The High Court modified the award to enhance the compensation amount based on superior court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Award dated 26.08.2016 modified; respondents directed to pay enhanced compensation of Rupees 3,00,000/- within three months.

Sri. Somappa Siddappa Ajankatti Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

: 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 NO.107563/2017 (L-TER)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. SOMAPPA SIDDAPPA AJANKATTI, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KADATANHAL, TALUK: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.T M NADAF, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, ENVIRONMENT AND BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA,AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, SUB-DIVISION BAILHONGAL, BELAGAVI.

¶14

THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, FOREST DEPARTMENT, CHACHADI, SAVADATTI, BAILHONGAL,DIST: BELAGAVI. ... RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SMT. VEENA HEGDE, AGA FOR R1-R3)

¶16

: 2 :

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 26.08.2016 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, BELAGAVI IN REFERENCE NO.11/2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-G.

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner was appointed as Plantation Watchman during the period from 1983 to 1987 by the Range Forest Officer, Hidkal Range, Hidkal. Thereafter he was transferred to Bailhongal Range Forest Office and he worked there till 1996. His services were dispensed on 28.02.1996, on account of the fact that he was involved in a criminal case. The termination order was the subject matter of Reference No.11/2012, wherein the Labour Court allowed the Reference in part while directing the respondents to pay a compensation amount of Rs.55,000/-.

¶21

The respondents have not questioned the validity of the award dated 26.08.2016 passed by the Labour Court. On the other hand, petitioner is feeling

¶22

: 3 :

¶23

aggrieved by grant of meager compensation of Rs.55,000/-, on the score that he has rendered services from 1983 to 1996 as is evident from Annexures H and J.

¶24

No doubt the petitioner’s services have been dispensed on account of his involvement in a criminal case. Even if the services of an adhoc/daily wage employee were terminated, in such an event, formal enquiry is required to be held as held by this Court in the case of Shantalakshmi Vs. State of Karnataka . That apart, petitioner is entitled for enhanced compensation in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Bhurumal reported in (2014) 7 SCC 177 read with BSNL Vs. Man Singh reported in (2012) 1 SCC 558 .

¶25

Having regard to the services rendered by the petitioner for the period from 1983 to 1996, petitioner is entitled to enhancement of compensation from Rs.55,000/- to Rs.3,00,000/-.

¶26

: 4 :

¶27

Accordingly, the award dated 26.08.2016 passed by the Labour Court, Belagavi, in Reference No.11/2012 is modified. The respondents are hereby directed to pay the enhanced compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- within a period of three months from today, failing which, petitioner is entitled to the interest at 6% p.a. on the compensation amount.

¶28

Petition stands disposed of.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

gab

Sri. Somappa Siddappa Ajankatti v. the Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Somappa Siddappa Ajankatti v. the Secretary to

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. Obalaraju Vs State of Karnataka by

Smt Pooja C Sarangamath Vs the Registrar

Ravi S/O Basappa Ganiger Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Devarayappa Vs the Divisional Controller

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

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