Allowed

The Chief Traffic Manager v. Sri Jayaramu C v

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2023WP/46877/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging an order regarding gratuity payment. The court disposed of the petition based on a joint memo where the parties mutually settled the dispute for a reduced amount, directing the Controlling Authority to pay the settlement amount to the employee and refund the excess deposit to the B.M.T.C.

What did the court decide?

The Controlling Authority was directed to pay Rs. 70,942/- to the first respondent and refund Rs. 1,34,224/- to the petitioner.

The Chief Traffic Manager Vs Sri Jayaramu… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.46877 OF 2018 (L-KSRTC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

THE CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER, B.M.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027, HEREIN REP. BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER, B.M.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICES, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. B.L.SANJEEV., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI JAYARAMU C.V. S/O. LATE. VENKATAYYA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, C/O. LAKSHMEESHA, NO. 23, 11^TH CROSS, CHOLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, BANGALORE SUB-DIVISION - 3, KARMIKA BHAVAN, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 029.

¶14

¶15

NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶16

THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, BANGALORE DIVISION - 3, KARMIKA BHAVAN, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 029.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KANTHARAJA.V., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT. SPOORTHI.V., HCGP FOR R2 AND R3 )

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Sri.B.L.Sanjeev., learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Naveen Kumar., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.Kantharaja.V., for respondent No.1 and Smt.V.Spoorthi., learned HCGP for respondents 2 & 3 have appeared in person.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.1 jointly submits that a joint memo has been filed stating that the petitioner and respondent No.1 have agreed to settle the case. Counsel therefore, submits that the joint memo may be placed on record and the Writ Petition may be disposed of in terms of the joint memo.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶26

Submission is noted. Joint memo is placed on record. It reads as under:

¶27

"JOINT MEMO

¶28

"In the above case, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.06.2017 passed by the Labour Officer & Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, Sub-Division-3, Bengaluru (Respondent No.2) vide Annexure-A; wherein the Petitioner was directed to pay Rs.1,87,707/- to the 1^st respondent towards difference of gratuity amount with 10% interest from 13.04.2016 and also to pay interest of Rs.17,459/- for delay in payment of gratuity already paid to him. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Assistant Labour Commissioner & Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, Division3, Bengaluru (Respondent No.3); who by order dated 23.05.2018 (Annexure-B) dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner and confirmed the order passed by the Controlling Authority. It is submitted that while filing the appeal, the petitioner has deposited a sum of

¶29

¶30

NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶31

Rs.2,05,166/- as per the order of the Controlling Authority.

¶32

2. Petitioner submits that during the pendency of the above petition, the Petitioner and the respondent No.1 have amicably settled the dispute between them

¶33

in the above case on the following terms and conditions:-

¶34

(i) Instead of Rs.1,87,707/- awarded by

¶35

the respondent authorities towards difference of gratuity amount, the Respondent No.1 is ready and willing to receive Rs.46,297/towards difference of gratuity amount with interest @ 10% from 13.04.2016 till 03.11.2017 i.e., till the date on which the petitioner deposited the difference of gratuity amount as per the order of Controlling Authority; and Rs.17,459/- being the interest

¶36

for the delay in payment of gratuity already paid by the petitioner to him; which works out at total Rs.70,942/- (Rs.46,297+Rs.7,186 i.e.,

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶38

10% interest from 13.04.2016 to 03.11.2017

¶39

[1 year 6 months 19 days] +Rs.17,459/-).

¶40

(ii) The petitioner is ready and willing to

¶41

pay the above said amount agreed upon by the Respondent No.1 i.e., to pay him

¶42

Rs.70,942/-

¶43

(iii) The amount agreed by the Petitioner to be paid to the Respondent No.1 i.e., Rs.70,942/- is in full and final settlement of the claim of Respondent No.1 for difference of gratuity amount and interest from the Petitioner.

¶44

(iv) In view of this settlement, the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 shall have no claim whatsoever against each other with regard to the dispute in this writ petition.

¶45

(v) It is submitted that in view of the settlement arrived at between the petitioner & Respondent No.1, the petitioner is entitled for refund of the amount deposited before the Controlling Authority after paying Rs.70,942/-

¶46

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶47

to the 1^st respondent i.e., for refund of Rs.1,34,224/-.

¶48

WHEREFORE, the Petitioner and respondent No.1

¶49

respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispose of the above writ petition in view of this joint memo and further be pleased to direct the 2^nd respondent to refund the balance amount of Rs.1,34,224/to the petitioner after paying Rs.70,942/- to Respondent No.1 as per the settlement, in the interest of justice".

¶50

Sri.Jayaramu.C.V - the first respondent is present before the Court and he has been duly identified by his counsel Sri.Naveen Kumar.

¶51

When queried by this Court, Sri.Jayaramu.C.V - the first respondent submits that he has understood the contents of the joint memo and has agreed for the settlement.

¶52

Taking note of the joint memo, the Controlling Authority is directed to pay a sum of Rs.70,942/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Two only) to the first respondent after due identification and the balance of

¶53

NC: 2023:KHC:46226 WP No. 46877 of 2018

¶54

¶55

amount of Rs.1,34,224/- (Rupees One Lakhs Thirty Four Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Four only) shall be refunded to the Corporation.

¶56

As a result, the Writ Petition is disposed of in

¶57

terms of the joint memo.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

The Chief Traffic Manager v. Sri Jayaramu C v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chief Traffic Manager v. Sri Jayaramu C v

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 Karnataka State Road Vs Sri. K L Krupakara

The Divisional Controller Vs Sri. N.B. Sunila Kumara

karnataka state road transport corporation Vs Krishna

Sri Gangahanumaiah Dead by Lrs Vs Sri Govindaiah Dead by Lr'S Sri Narayana

Sri Gangahanumaiah Dead by Lrs Vs Sri Narayana

The Toyota Kirloskar Motor Employees Union Vs the State of Karnataka