Allowed

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. the Assistatnt Labour

Karnataka HC9 Jul 2024WP/2890/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court of Karnataka allowed the petition by quashing the Appellate Authority order dated 27.12.2018. The Court held that the Authority exceeded its jurisdiction by enhancing interest on gratuity, holding the Controlling Authority order final, and set aside the enhanced interest, confirming the lower order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the Appellate Authority order dated 27.12.2018 to the extent of enhancing interest; confirmation of the Controlling Authority order.

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:26019 WP No. 2890 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 2890 OF 2020 (L-KSRTC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHIKMAGALUR DIVISION, CHIKMAGALUR, BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

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

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, CHIKMAGALUR DIVISION, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶13

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, CHIKMAGALUR DIVISION, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶16

R.F.WAZEER S/O FAKRUDDIN, ADULT, R/O CHRISTIAN COLONY, NEAR MANGO FARM, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. AMARAVATHY.H.R., AGA FOR R1 AND R2; R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:26019 WP No. 2890 of 2020

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Smt.H.R.Renuka., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Amaravathy.H.R., learned AGA for respondents 1 & 2 have appeared in person.

¶24

Emergent notice to respondent No.3 was issued on 06.02.2020. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.3 is served and unrepresented. The third respondent neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person.

¶25

2. The short facts are these:

¶26

The third respondent was appointed as a Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation and was placed on probation in the year 1980. He attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2008. The Corporation paid the gratuity to the workman. However, he moved an application

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:26019 WP No. 2890 of 2020

¶28

before the Controlling Authority claiming a difference in gratuity on 11.10.2013. The Controlling Authority vide order dated:31.03.2016 allowed the application and determined the gratuity. Aggrieved by the order of the Controlling Authority, the Corporation preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority vide order dated:27.12.2018 enhanced the rate of interest on gratuity. The order of Appellate Authority is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner and AGA for respondents 1 & 2 have urged several contentions. Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.

¶30

A perusal of the order of the Appellate Authority reveals that the Appellate Authority exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the Corporation to pay Rs.46,728/- (Rupees Forty Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Eight only) towards interest as against Rs.11,681/- (Rupees Eleven Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty One only). The order of

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:26019 WP No. 2890 of 2020

¶32

the Controlling Authority has become final as for the third respondent is concerned, hence, there cannot be a order in favor of the third respondent in an appeal filed by the Corporation. The order to the extent of enhancing the interest amount from Rs.11,681/- (Rupees Eleven Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty One only) to Rs.46,728/- (Rupees Forty Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Eight only) is erroneous and unjust. For the reasons stated above, the order of the Appellate Authority is liable to be set-aside. Accordingly, it is set-aside. The order of the Controlling Authority is confirmed.

¶33

The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:27.12.2018 passed by the Appellate Authority in ¸ÀASÉå:¸ÀPÁDa/¦.f.J/ªÉÄÃ®ä£À«/51/2017-18 vide Annexure-C is

¶34

quashed.

¶35

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed .

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. the Assistatnt Labour

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. the Assistatnt Labour

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

G.N. Hanumanthe Gowda Vs the Divisional Controller

Yogesha Vs M/S Maharaja Residential Museum

Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Administration)

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs Meer Sajjad Hussain

The Chief Traffic Manager Vs Sri. Rangaswamaiah

K Srinivasaiah Vs Management of Pcs Technologies Limited