Disposed

Karnataka State Road, v. D.L. Huchegowda

Karnataka HC1 Feb 2024WP/8180/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

KSRTC's writ petition challenging a Labour Court award reinstating a workman was settled before the Lok Adalat. Per the joint memo, the workman was to be reinstated without backwages but with continuity of service and consequential benefits, giving up 75% of awarded backwages. Petition disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Workman reinstated without backwages from date of dismissal till actual reinstatement, with continuity of service and consequential benefits; 75% of awarded backwages given up by workman; petition dis

Karnataka State Road, Vs D.L. Huchegowda — 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 1^ST 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.8180/2017 (LK) (Lok Adalath No. 687/2024)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

AND:

¶13

D.L. Huchegowda S/o D.L. Lakshmanagowda, Adult, R/o Devalapura, Nagamangala Taluk, Mandya District – 570 023. …RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. L. SHEKAR, ADVOCATE )

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE

¶16

¶17

AWARD DATED 16.06.2016 IN REF NO. 08/2016 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, C/C LABOUR COURT, MYSURU VIDE ANNEXURE ‘G’.

¶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 16.06.2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, C/c Labour Court, Mysuru in Ref. No. 08/2016 vide Annexure ‘G’.

¶21

After negotiations, the parties have arrived at settlement. Accordingly, both the parties have filed a Joint Memo duly signed before the Lok Adalath. The said Joint Memo reads as follows :

¶22

“The petitioner – KSRTC has agreed to reinstate the workman into service without backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of actual reinstatement. The consequential benefits and continuity of service will be extended to the workman.

¶23

The respondent – workman has agreed to give-up 75% backwages awarded by the Labour Court, if he is extended continuity of service and consequential benefits”.

¶24

¶25

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award dated 16.06.2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, C/c Labour Court, Mysuru in Ref. No. 08/2016 vide Annexure ‘G’.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/MEMBER

Rbv*

FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 8180/2017

¶31

(LOK ADALATH NO. 687/2024)

¶32

BETWEEN : KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

¶33

AND : D.L HUCHEGOWDA ... Respondent

¶34

JOINT MEMO

¶35

The WP filed against the award in Ref. No.8/2016 Dated 16.06.2016 on the file of the Presiding Officer, C/C Labour Court, Mysuru, has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under:

¶36

¶37

The respondent – workman has agreed to give-up 75% backwages awarded by the Labour Court, if he is extended continuity of service and consequential benefits”.

¶38

The parties to this petition have set their hands to this settlement before the Lok Adalat in the presence of Conciliators on this 01/02/2024 at Bengaluru Bench.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER SIGNATURE OF RESPONDENT

¶41

Sd/Sd/ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER ADVOCATE FOR REPONDENT

Karnataka State Road, v. D.L. Huchegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka State Road, v. D.L. Huchegowda

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

Sri Umesha Vs Smt Nirmala N

Mahanthesha Vs G.M. Jagadeesh

The Divisional Controller and Vs Sri Revanasiddiah

The Divisional Controller Vs Sri Shivashankar K T

Manikantan Vs the Divisional Controller

Eranna Vs Narasimhamurthy C M