Disposed

Shankar v. Union of India

Karnataka HC2 Mar 2021WP/3635/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The court quashed a Tribunal order on account of the petitioner's disablement. Liberty was reserved to the petitioner to make a representation for employment as casual labour while considering the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of in the terms of reserving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation for casual labour employment.

Shankar Vs Union of India — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

¶8

W.P.No.3635/2021 (S – CAT)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

Shankar, S/o Shri Siddaiah, Aged about 41 years, R/o Door No.12/1, L-7, Sivayogi School Ground, Mahadevapura Main Road, Gandhinagar, Mysore – 570 007. … Petitioner

¶11

(By Sri. Tarsem Chand Gupta, Adv.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Union of India, through the Finance Secretary, Ministry of finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi – 110 001.

¶14

Pr. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka & Goa Region, Queens Road, Bangalore – 560 001.

¶15

¶16

3. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Residency Road, Mysore – 570 010. … Respondents

¶17

(By Sri. Madanan Pillai.R, CGSC for R-1.)

¶18

This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India praying to in view of the facts and grounds enumerated above, it is most respectfully prayed that order dated 13.02.2020 in OA No.1165/2019 passed by the CAT Bench Bangalore {Shankar VS. UOI & Ors.,} Annexure-A and respondent order dated 29.08.2019, may kindly be quashed and set aside. The WP may kindly be allowed in terms of prayer made and the respondents may be directed to take back the petitioner in service retrospectively from 29.08.2019 with all consequential benefits.

¶19

This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, NAGARATHNA, J., made the following:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioner had filed O.A.No.170/01165/2019 before

¶22

the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred

¶23

¶24

to as ‘the Tribunal’, for the sake of brevity). The said application was dismissed by order dated 13.02.2020.

¶25

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madanan Pillai, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶26

The prayer sought by the petitioner was not considered by the Tribunal on account of the disablement sustained by the petitioner during the pendency of his application before the Tribunal. Be that as it may. De hors the order of the Tribunal, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make a representation to the concerned respondents for permitting him to serve in the respondent/department as a casual labour. It is needless to observe that if such a representation is made by the petitioner, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and particularly with reference to the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

¶27

¶28

Writ Petition is disposed in the aforesaid terms.

No Costs.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

PKS

Shankar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar v. Union of India

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

The Management of Karnataka Vs the Vice President

Aravinda Thayyar Girls High School Vs Smt. L. Vidyavathi

Union of India Vs Shri Y N Chamaraj

Narayana P Vs Union of India

Sri. Ananthaswamy Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Chinnamma Vs D. a. Chandrashekaraiah