Partly allowed

The Regional Manager v. R Kodandaram

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2024WP/4059/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court partially allowed the Managing Authority's writ petition and dismissed the workman's petition regarding reinstatement with back wages. The Court held that no back wages are due for the period between dismissal and superannuation, but termination was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award set aside to the extent it directed back wages from dismissal to superannuation; remaining award sustained; power to award back wages during suspension period restored.

The Regional Manager Vs R Kodandaram — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO. 4059 OF 2021 (L-RES)

¶9

C/W

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 9221 OF 2021 (L-TER) IN WP No. 4059/2021:

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

THE REGIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE: NO 28, UNITY BUILDING, ANNEXE P, KALINGA RAO ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027.

¶13

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. H.R RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI P.B RAJU, ADVOCATE )

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

R KODANDARAM, S/O LATE B RAMAIAH, AGED MAJOR, R/AT D NO. 100, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, 3^RD CROSS, 3^RD PHASE, I BLOCK, KATRIGUPPE WATER TANK, BANASHANKARI 3^RD STAGE, BANGALORE SOUTH, HOSAKEREHALLI, BANGALORE-560 085.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI V. S NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTILCE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 6.12.2019 IN CR.NO.16/2005, PASSED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE (ANNEXURE-G).

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶22

IN WP NO. 9221/2021:

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

SRI. R KODANDARAMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LATE B.RAMAIAH, R/A 100, IV MAIN, III CROSS, III PHASE, NEAR KATHARAGUPPE WATER TANK, HOSAKEREHALLI, BANGALORE-85.

¶25

...PETITIONER

¶26

(BY SRI NAIK V S, ADVOCATE)

¶27

AND:

¶28

THE REGIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE: 2-B, UNITY BLDGS, ANNEXE P, KALINGA RAO ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027.

¶29

...RESPONDENT

¶30

(BY SMT. H.R RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI P.B RAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶31

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO ANNEXURE-A FROM THE C.G.I.T.-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE AND TO QUASH THE AWARD PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUMLABOUR COURT, AT BANGALORE IN C.R.NO.16/2005 DATED 6.12.2019, CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A TO THE EXTENT THE PETITIONER IS AGGRIEVED ETC.

¶32

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI

¶34

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)

¶37

These two Petitions, one by the Workman and the

¶38

other by the Management, seek to call in question the Central Government Industrial Tribunal’s Award dated 06.12.2019 rendered in an industrial dispute vide CR No.16/2005, whereby employee’s claim having been favoured, notional reinstatement with 75% of back wages has been directed.

¶39

Learned counsel appearing for Workman submits that his client having attained the age of superannuation and he having been kept out of employment unjustifiably, the Tribunal ought to have awarded full back wages once it came to the conclusion that the punishment order of dismissal dated 20.09.2000 was unsustainable. He further presses into service the doctrine of honourable acquittal in the criminal case of his client by placing reliance upon P V RUDRAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA¹ . Learned Sr. Panel Counsel appearing for the Management per contra contends that the Tribunal

¶40

1 2024 LiveLaw (kar) 59

¶41

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶42

was not justified in setting aside dismissal order having recorded a finding that the Workman had not discharged the shifted onus to show that the enquiry was not properly held. She denies invokability of P V RUDRAPPA , supra .

¶43

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, we are inclined to grant a limited indulgence in Management’s W.P.No.4059/2021 and decline interference in Workman’s companion W.P.No.9221/2021 for the following reasons: 3.1 This Workman along with two others happened to be accused in Spl. C.C.No.47/1998 wherein other two workmen came to be convicted & sentenced for the offences punishable under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 420 & 468 of IPC, 1860 vide Judgement & Order dated 20.07.2002 made by the learned Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru. However, Petitioner-Workman who was Accused No.3 came to be acquitted observing that “ there is no evidence nor is it the case of the prosecution that A-

¶44

1 and A-2 had conspired with A-3 or that A-3 had conspired with A-1 and A-2 in getting enrolled the name of

¶45

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶46

PW 32 as an agent to achieve the aforesaid alleged illegal

¶47

object… ”. Arguably, case of the Workman broadly fits into P V RUDRAPPA wherein paragraph No.3(c) which reads as under:

¶48

“The idea of ‘honourable acquittal’ is not easy to define although it can be illustrated. If an accused is discharged at pre-trial stage or the criminal proceeding launched against him is quashed, there is no difficulty in treating the same as the cases of ‘honourable acquittal’ for the limited purpose of disciplinary enquiry. (We are mindful that the question of acquittal comes post trial). A case of ‘honourable acquittal’ may arise when, after trial the Criminal Court orders acquittal with any of nearly the following illustrives:

¶49

(i) the accused is falsely prosecuted to seek vengeance or for some ulterior motive.

¶50

(ii) that there is absolutely no evidence to implicate the accused in the proceedings;

¶51

(iii) there is very little evidence which is insufficient to connect the accused with the commission of crime;

¶52

(iv) the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges against the accused;

¶53

(v) the prosecution witnesses are unworthy of any credit and their version does not generate any confidence.

¶54

We again say that the above are only illustrative and not exhaustive. We would also add a caveat that in considering as to whether the case of delinquent is of ‘honourable acquittal’, the entire judgement in Criminal Case should be perused. It is also desirable to secure a copy of record of the proceedings for examination, unless the said exercise poses practical difficulty. At least, it

¶55

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶56

should be open to the delinquent employee to produce such copies.”

¶57

3.2 The Workman was given an opportunity to lead his evidence to demonstrate that the enquiry held against him

¶58

was not justified, once the Management had prima facie shown it to be properly done. The Tribunal in its impugned Award at some places has observed that the Workman had an opportunity to demonstrate the unsustainability of enquiry proceedings that resulted into dismissal from service. We are amazed that why the acquittal order in the criminal case was not produced and got marked as a piece of evidence from the side of Workman. However at this length of time, no purpose would be served by remanding the matter for consideration afresh. After all, the order of acquittal has been cursorily referred to in the Tribunal’s Award at its page 3. Be that as it may. The Workman admittedly has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and therefore, he should be left free to enjoy the evening of his life. Justice of the case warrants that he having not worked during the period between

¶59

¶60

NC: 2024:KHC:47071-DB WP No. 4059 of 2021 C/W WP No. 9221 of 2021

¶61

dismissal from service and date of attaining the age of superannuation, no back wages need be awarded. However, in all other respect, the Tribunal’s Award has to be sustained. However, it is made clear that the Workman shall be paid arrears of salary for the suspension period which shall not be treated as dies-non .

¶62

In the above circumstances, Workman’s W.P.No.9221/2021 is dismissed and Management’s W.P.No.4059/2021 is partly allowed. The impugned Award only to the extent it directs payment of back wages till retirement, is set at naught; rest of the Award is left unaltered.

¶63

The Management shall give effect to the modified Award within a period of three months by sanctioning/paying all terminal benefits to the Workman, such as Pension, DCRG, PF, etc., failing which, delay shall carry interest at the rate of 1% per mensum for the first month and 2% for the period next following.

¶64

Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

¶65

Sd/(C M JOSHI) JUDGE

¶66

tsn*/bsv

The Regional Manager v. R Kodandaram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Regional Manager v. R Kodandaram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Basavaraj Menashinakai, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ajay S Pathange Vs Sri B R Sathyanarayana Rao

Sri Srinath Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Shailaja K L Vs the State of Karnataka

National Institute of Mental Health Vs Smt S Anitha Joseph

Sri. S. Pratap Reddy Vs State of Karnataka