Partly allowed

Smt Gangutai D/O Goudappa Naganuri v. the Managing Director

Karnataka HC18 May 2023WP/102547/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a bus conductor advised lighter duty due to injury, filed writ petition seeking alternate post, resulting in stay of termination and directive to consider representation within four weeks under writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's services not to be discontinued; 2nd respondent to consider representation within four weeks.

Smt Gangutai D/O Goudappa Naganuri Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 102547 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 102547 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT GANGUTAI D/O GOUDAPPA NAGANURI AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: CONDUCTOR NO.3308 AT N W K R T C BELAGAVI DEPOT NO 1, BELAGAVI 590002 DIST: BELAGAVI

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI M S HARAVI, ADVOCATE.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION CENTRAL OFFICES GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI DIST. DHARWAD-580009

¶14

CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANILocation:DHARWADDate: 2023.05.1817:47:32 -0700

¶15

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION BELAGAVI DIVISION BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590002

¶16

THE DEPOT MANAGER NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION BELAGAVI DEPOT NO.1, (R) BELAGAVI DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI PRASHANT S. HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE.)

¶19

¶20

WP No. 102547 of 2023

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO ISSUE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONTINUE THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER IN THE ALTERNATIVE POST AT 3^RD RESPONDENT DEPOT BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY HER DATED 15.04.2023, VIDE ANNEXURE-J, ETC.,.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Captioned writ petition is filed by petitioner, who was appointed as Conductor with respondent corporation. On account of grievous injuries sustained by the petitioner, the petitioner on assessment by the competent doctor was advised to do a lighter job.

¶25

The petitioner claims that she has submitted a detailed representation to the respondents requesting to continue the services of the petitioner in the alternate post by considering the representation dated 15.04.2023, vide Annexure-J.

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent

¶27

corporation on instruction has made a statement that if

¶28

¶29

WP No. 102547 of 2023

¶30

reasonable time is granted, respondents will consider the representation submitted by the petitioner, vide

¶31

Annexure-J and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶32

Statement made by the standing counsel for

¶33

respondent corporation is taken on record.

¶34

For the reasons stated supra, I proceed to pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶37

ii) The 2^nd respondent is hereby directed to consider the representation of petitioner dated 15.04.2023, vide Annexure-J, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law.

¶38

¶39

WP No. 102547 of 2023

¶40

iii) Pending consideration of the writ petition, the respondents are directed not to discontinue the services of the petitioner, till appropriate orders are passed in accordance with law.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

MRK

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Smt Gangutai D/O Goudappa Naganuri v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gangutai D/O Goudappa Naganuri v. the Managing Director

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

Chandrashekhar S/O Gurulingappa Mayakar Vs Dharmanagouda S/O Bheemanagouda Patil

Subramani Urf Mani S/O. Nagabushan Vs the State of Karnataka

H R Prabhakara Murthy Vs Sowbhagyamma

Sri Omanna S/O Maruti Gondakar Vs the Managing Director

Sri. Murulidhar S/O. Maruti Patil Vs Sri. Sachin S/O. Mohan Kallimani

Smt. Kadiramma Vs State of Karnataka