Disposed

Sri. a M Betakurki v. Karnataka State Road Transport

Karnataka HC19 Aug 2024WP/33096/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of two connected writ petitions filed against a Labour Court award in a service dispute. The petitions were settled by the parties via a joint memorandum, leading to the disposal of the writ petitions with an instruction for compliance.

What did the court decide?

Joint memo accepted; writ petitions disposed; Corporation to comply with settlement terms within eight weeks.

Sri. a M Betakurki Vs Karnataka State Road… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:33281 WP No. 33096 of 2018 C/W WP No. 18419 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.33096 OF 2018 (L-KSRTC)

¶8

C/W

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO.18419 OF 2017 (L-KSRTC)

¶10

IN W.P. NO.33096 OF 2018

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

SRI A.M. BETAKURKI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O. SRI MUDAKA REDDY, R/AT C/O. SRI RAJESH BETAKURKI NO.5, POLICE QUARTERS, VASANTHANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 052. ... PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI V.S. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, DAVANAGERE DIVISION, DAVANAGERE – 577 001 BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER. ... RESPONDENT

¶17

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

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE LABOUR COURT, HIBBALLI, PERTAINING TO ANNEXURE-A AND; QUASH THE AWARD DATED 08.07.2016 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, HUBBALLI, IN REF.NO.35 OF 2013 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A TO THE EXTENT THE PETITIONER IS AGGRIEVED AND ETC.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:33281 WP No. 33096 of 2018 C/W WP No. 18419 of 2017

¶21

IN W.P. NO.18419 OF 2017

¶22

BETWEEN:

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

AND:

¶26

A.M. BATAKURKI S/O. MUDUKDVADDI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. HANCHINAL TALUK SAUNDATTI, DISTRICT BELGAUM – 582 166. ... RESPONDENT

¶27

(BY SRI V.S. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 08.07.2016 IN REF.NO.35/2013 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, HUBBALLI (ANNEXURE-G).

¶29

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

A joint memo is filed duly signed by the respective

¶32

counsel stating that the respondent-workman is entitled

¶33

for terminal benefits from the date of dismissal till the date

¶34

of superannuation by considering the period as continuity

¶35

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33281 WP No. 33096 of 2018 C/W WP No. 18419 of 2017

¶36

of service for terminal benefits. The joint memo reads as under:

¶37

“These writ petitions are filed by the parties against the Award dated 08.07.2016 in Ref. No.35/2013 passed by the Labour Court, Hubballi. The matter is settled between the parties on the following terms and as such, the Writ Petitions may kindly be disposed of in terms of this Joint Memo.

¶38

“The Respondent – Workman is entitled for terminal benefits from the date of dismissal till the date of superannuation by considering the period as continuity of service for terminal benefits.”

¶39

The joint memo is taken on record.

¶40

In view of the joint memo, the writ petitions

¶41

stand disposed of . The petitioner-Corporation to comply with the order within eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶42

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶43

MBM

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

Sri. a M Betakurki v. Karnataka State Road Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. a M Betakurki v. Karnataka State Road Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri M Dhananjaya Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri P B Hemachandra Vs Dr Kamath B N N

Mr Azamthullah a Vs Bescom Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.

M/S a T & S Company Ltd. Vs a T & S Drivers &

N Krishna Murthy Vs the Divisional Controller

M/S L T Karle (Karle International) Vs Smt. S Umamaheshwari