Disposed

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. G Srinivasareddy

Karnataka HC22 Feb 2024WP/15087/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

KSRTC's writ petition against a reinstatement award was settled before Lok Adalat: the workman is reinstated with continuity of service, without backwages or consequential benefits, subject to withholding of three annual increments, and the award stands modified accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed per Joint Memo; award modified — reinstatement with continuity, no backwages or consequential benefits, three annual increments withheld.

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BENGALURU BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶5

CONCILIATORS PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA &

¶7

SRI. P.D. SUBRAMANYA, MEMBER

¶8

W.P.No.15087/2023 (LK) (Lok Adalath No. 1094/2024)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Chikkaballapur Division, Chikkaballapur, by its Divisional Controller, Represented by its Chief Law Officer.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

G. Srinivasa Reddy S/o Govinda Reddy, Aged about 47 years, R/o V.V. Puram, Gauribidanur Town, Chikkaballapur District-561 208. …RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. SOMASHEKARA REDDY K.V., ADVOCATE )

¶16

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 05.04.2022 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPUR IN I.D. REF NO. 13/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE ‘E’.

¶18

THE PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED:

¶19

CONCILIATION ORDER

¶20

In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Award dated 05.04.2022 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur in I.D. Ref No. 13/2020 vide Annexure ‘E’.

¶21

After negotiations, the parties have arrived at settlement. Accordingly,

¶22

both the parties have filed a Joint Memo duly signed before the Lok Adalath.

¶23

The said Joint Memo reads as follows :

¶24

“The petitioner – KSRTC has agreed to reinstate the respondent – workman into service with continuity of service, without backwages, without consequential benefits from the date of dismissal till the date of actual reinstatement by withholding 3 (three) annual increments with cumulative effect.

¶25

Further, the absent period will be treated as not a continuous service under Section 2A of the Gratuity Act. The pending default cases, if any, which are filed will be re-opened. The respondent – workman has agreed for the said settlement”.

¶26

¶27

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo

¶28

modifying the Award dated 05.04.2022 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur in I.D. Ref No. 13/2020 vide Annexure ‘E’.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/MEMBER

Rbv*

FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 15087/2023

¶34

(LOK ADALATH NO. 1094/2024)

¶35

BETWEEN : KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ... Petitioner AND :

¶36

G. SRINIVASAREDDY ... Respondent JOINT MEMO

¶37

The WP filed against the award in Ref. No. 13/2020 Dated 05.04.2022 on the file of The Principal District And Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur, has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under:

¶38

¶39

¶40

The parties to this petition have set their hands to this settlement before the Lok Adalat in the presence of Conciliators on this 22/02/2024 at Bengaluru Bench.

¶41

Sd/Sd/-

¶42

SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER SIGNATURE OF RESPONDENT

¶43

Sd/Sd/ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER ADVOCATE FOR REPONDENT

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. G Srinivasareddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. G Srinivasareddy

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

Smt.Rajeshwari Vs K.S.Kusuma

Anusuya Vs K.S.Kusuma

Santhosh R Vs Mohammed Sadiq Baig

The Divisional Controller Vs Sri Bhemappa Valikar

Gopashetty Vs the Divisional Controller

Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation Vs Mallikarjun Shande