A daily-wage Extension Farmer removed from service challenged the Labour Court's rejection of his reference claiming violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The High Court held his employment was purely temporary and terminable without notice, found no infirmity in the award, and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:24379 WP No. 1532 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 1532 OF 2015 (L-TER)
BETWEEN:
S.REVANNA S/O SIDDALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O SARAGURU, SALIGRAMA HOBLI, K.R.NAGAR, MYSORE DISTRICT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRACHAR.M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. AMARAVATHY.H.R., AGA)
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 FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2024:KHC:24379 WP No. 1532 of 2015
ORDER
Sri.Raghavendrachar.M., learned counsel for the
petitioner has appeared through video conferencing.
Smt.Amaravathy. H.R., learned AGA for the respondents has appeared in person.
2. The short facts are these:
The petitioner contends that he was appointed as an Extension Farmer by the respondents on a consolidated salary of Rs.200/- (Rupees Two Hundred only) on 01.01.1981. He had worked in such a capacity till 2008. He had rendered service for more than 240 days in the year. He contends that he was removed from service on 02.01.2008 and the removal is a violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The State Government referred the dispute to the Labor Court, Mysore in Reference No.15/1998. The Labour Court vide order dated 16.08.2013 rejected the reference. It is this award that is called into question in this Writ petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ petition.
NC: 2024:KHC:24379 WP No. 1532 of 2015
behalf of respective parties and perused the Writ paper with utmost care.
The issue revolves around a narrow compass. The petitioner was taken as an Extension Farmer on a daily wage basis. He was not a permanent employee. The memo dated:01.01.1981 issued by the Assistant Director of Sericulture, Hunsur makes it clear that the employment was purely temporary and will be terminated at any time without prior notice. The Labor Court extenso referred to the material on record and rightly rejected the reference. In my view, the rejection is just and proper. I find no infirmity in the Award, and I decline to interfere. Resultantly, the writ petition is
dismissed .
Sd/JUDGE
MRP
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39
2 issues framed by the court
Was the removal of a daily-wage Extension Worker, engaged purely temporarily without prior notice, a violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act?
Did the Labour Court err in rejecting the reference challenging the removal?
3 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Revanna
The Assistant Director, Sericulture, Government Silk Rearing Center, Satanahally
Secretary, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Government of Karnataka
Jyoti Mulimani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
