Partly allowed

Sri D Ramu v. the Chief General Manager

Karnataka HC22 Dec 2021WP/16473/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted an interim order directing the respondent to pay the petitioner Rs.1,47,871 with 6% interest within four weeks, subject to the final outcome of the petition and keeping all issues on merits open, as counsel argued over the existence of an employment relationship.

What did the court decide?

Interim direction to respondent to pay petitioner Rs.1,47,871 with 6% interest from December 2015 within four weeks, subject to final outcome.

Sri D Ramu Vs the Chief General Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.16473 OF 2017 (L–RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI.D.RAMU S/O LATE DASA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO.47, 10^TH CROSS RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT MYSURU - 570 019

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.V.S.NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER B.E.M.L LIMITED MYSORE COMPLEX BELAVADI POST MYSURU - 571 186

¶12

... RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI.K.S.BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE)

¶14

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 03.06.2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEX-H SINCE THE SAME IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED AND ETC.

¶16

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

On 24.11.2021, this Court passed the following order;

¶20

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent on prayer No.(b) of the petition, which reads as under:

¶21

"b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or direction directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1,47,871/- [Rupees One lakh forty seven thousand and eight hundred and seventy one only] to the petitioner as per the statement of calculation prepared by the respondent vide Annex-E along with interest @ 18% p.a. from December 2015 till the date of actual payment and the cost of these proceedings."

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of non-payment of the amount claimed by the petitioner at prayer No.(b) supra, petitioner/workman is being put to irreparable injury and hardship since he has no other source of livelihood and consequently, pending decision in this petition, it is necessary to pass appropriate interim orders directing the respondent to pay the said amount in favour of the petitioner.

¶23

¶24

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/BEML submits that the respondent is ready and willing to deposit the aforesaid amount with the Contractor under whom the petitioner is alleged to have been working and it is open for the petitioner to recover the said amount from the said Contractor since there is no relationship of employer and employee between the respondent and the petitioner.

¶25

Having regard to the aforesaid rival contentions with regard to the employer and employee relationship between the respondent and petitioner/workman, in order to ensure that the petitioner receives the said amount at the earliest, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and keeping open all issues on merits for adjudication at the time of final disposal of this petition, in the interest of justice, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the respondent to pay the sum of Rs.1,47,871/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from December 2015 till the date of payment to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶26

In the result, I pass the following:

¶27

¶28

ORDER

¶29

i. Pending disposal of this petition, respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,47,871/together with 6% interest from December 2015 till date of payment within a period of four weeks from today.

¶30

ii. It is made clear that this payment would be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and the payment would be subject to the final outcome of the petition.

¶31

iii. All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶32

iv. It is however made clear that this interim arrangement is restricted and limited to the present petition only and shall not be considered as a precedent under any circumstance whatsoever.

¶33

Re-list on 20.12.2021 to report

¶34

compliance."

¶35

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent jointly submit that pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 24.11.2021 passed by this Court, the petitioner has received a sum of Rs.2,01,104.56/- towards full and final settlement of the claim of the petitioner in the present petition.

¶37

The joint submission of the learned counsel for the

¶38

petitioner and the respondent is placed on record.

¶39

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶40

SD/JUDGE

¶41

NBM

Sri D Ramu v. the Chief General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri D Ramu v. the Chief General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation Vs G Meenakshi

Smt. G. Meenakshi Vs the Divisional Controller

The Executive Engineer Vs Smt. P. T. Mallamma @ P. T. Mallakka

M/S Gem Sugars Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Ranganatha Bar and Restaurant Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Bhavani Steel Corporation Vs the State of Karnataka