This Court directed the Labour Court to dispose of the dispute in the service matter within four months to expedite adjudication, holding that no interference with the impugned order was necessary.
Direction to the Labour Court to dispose of the Dispute in I.D.No.11/2019 within the outer limit of four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.12634 OF 2023 (L-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. AMRUTH V., AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O LATE VENKOBRAO, R/AT NO.13/1, R.K.STUDIO BUILDING, 50 FEET ROAD, MUNESHWARA BLOCK BANGALORE - 560 026. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S.B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE MANAGEMENT OF MTR FOODS PVT LTD., NO.1, 2ND AND 3RD CROSS, 100 FT INNER RING ROAD, EJIPURA, ASHWINI LAYOUT, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N VIVEKNAGAR, S O., Location: HIGH BANGALORE - 560 047, COURT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF PEOPLE OFFICER (NON GOVERNMENT COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956).
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. POORNACHANDRA B.PATTAR., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri.S.B.Mukkannappa., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Poornachandra B.Pattar., learned counsel for the respondent have appeared in person.
2. The facts are quite simple.
The petitioner joined the respondent Management as a Worker/helper, and he was a regular employee of the respondent. It is averred that he was illegally kept under suspension pending inquiry on 04.09.2013; thereafter, he was subjected to disciplinary inquiry and based on the finding of the inquiry officer, he was discharged from service.
The petitioner challenged the order of discharge in I.D.No.11/2019 before the III Addl. Labour Court, Bengaluru. The petitioner filed an interim application directing the respondent to pay the interim relief at Rs.17,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Thousand only) per month till the disposal of the dispute. The respondent filed a statement of objections to the application. The Labour Court after hearing the respective
NC: 2023:KHC:38323 WP No. 12634 of 2023
parties, rejected the application vide order dated 01.02.2023. It is this order that is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.
Sri.Poornachandra B.Pattar., learned counsel for the respondent submits that appropriate order may be passed.
The oral submission made on behalf of the respective parties is placed on record.
NC: 2023:KHC:38323 WP No. 12634 of 2023
the Writ Petition, directing the Labour Court to dispose of the Dispute within the outer limit of four months. Hence, the impugned order does not need interference.
Dispute in I.D.No.11/2019 within the outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
Sd/JUDGE
TKN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order of the Labour Court rejecting interim relief deserves interference to expedite disposal.
Whether the Labour Court must dispose of the dispute within four months.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri. Amruth V.
Management of MTR Foods Pvt Ltd.
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
