Dismissed¶60

The Secretary v. Dinakooli Nowkarara Sangha

Karnataka HC20 Mar 2025WA/1204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC writ appeal dismissed; Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act 2012; daily wage workmen; ten years of service as on 10.04.2006; endorsement dated 27.06.2023 set aside; coverage from 15.02.2013; Department of Archaeology and Museum; Hampi/Kamalapura; Industrial Tribunal awards ID No.503 of 1991 (31.08.1999) and ID No.3 of 1990; reinstatement May 2012 with continuity; W.P. No.14717/2023; W.P. No.6237 of 2022; coram N. V. Anjaria CJ and M.I. Arun J.

What did the court decide?

The learned Single Judge's finding that the employees, in service since 1980-81, had completed 10 years of service on the date the Act came into force and were entitled to the benefit on the basis of 10 years and more service is eminently proper and emanates from the facts on record. ¶57

The Secretary Vs Dinakooli Nowkarara Sangha — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶60

Issue for consideration

Whether the daily-wage workmen of the petitioner-Union, in service since 1980-81, had completed ten years of service as on 10.04.2006 / when the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 came into force, so as to be entitled to the benefits of the Act. +2 more

¶51

Court's answer

¶57

Ratio / Principle

This Division Bench is in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge on the entitlement of the workmen.

¶57

Key takeaways

No error could be found in the learned Single Judge's judgment (which had concluded that the endorsement dated 27.06.2023 and its reasons were incorrect and misdirected); accordingly the objection premised on the endorsement fails.ratio¶58
The appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge is meritless.ratio¶59
In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications do not survive and stand disposed of.ratio¶63

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (DB, per Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria, with Justice M.I. Arun) under S.4, Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 by the State (Secretary/Director/Deputy Director/Commissioner, Archaeology & Museum) against the learned Single Judge's order dated 08.09.2023 in W.P. No.14717/2023 (L-RES), which had set aside the endorsement dated 27.06.2023 and directed that the daily-wage workmen of the respondent-Union (Dinakooli Nowkarara Sangha) be covered under the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 from 15.02.2013 onwards with benefits. The workmen, engaged from 1980-81, had obtained Industrial Tribunal awards (ID No.503 of 1991, award dated 31.08.1999 - reinstatement with continuity; ID No.3 of 1990 - regularization) and were reinstated in May 2012 with continuity. The Division Bench agrees with the Single Judge that the workmen had completed 10 years of service as on 10.04.2006 / when the Act came into force, finds no error in the Single Judge's judgment, holds the appeal meritless, and dismisses it; pending interlocutory applications stand disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO. 1204 OF 2024 (L-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF KANNADA CULTURE

¶10

AND INFORMATION NO.1, GROUND FLOOR VIKAS SOUDHA

¶11

BENGALURU - 560 001

¶12

THE DIRECTOR DEPT. OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND MUSEUM PALACE COMPLEX

¶13

Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

MYSURU - 570 001

¶15

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (GULBARGA DIVISION) DIRECTORATE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND MUSEUM KAMALAPUR, HAMPI, HOSPET TALUK BELLARY DIST - 583 101

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER DEPT. OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND MUSEUM PALACE COMPLEX

¶17

MYSURU - 570 001

¶18

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶21

AND :

¶22

DINAKOOLI NOWKARARA SANGHA REGISTERED UNDER THE TRADE UNION ACT, 1926 REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ANCIENT MONUMENTS DIRECTORATE KAMALAPURA, HAMPI

¶23

HOSPET TALUK, BELLARY DISTRICT - 583 101.

¶24

…RESPONDENT

¶25

(BY SRI K.B. NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

¶26

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 08.09.2023 IN WRIT PETITION No.14717/2023 (L-RES) & ETC.

¶27

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶31

Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. Naveen

¶32

Chandrashekar for the appellant-State and learned advocate Mr. K.B. Narayanaswamy for the respondent.

¶33

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶34

2. The present appeal preferred by the State is directed against

¶35

judgment and order of learned Single Judge dated 08.09.2023, whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent-original petitionerUnion came to be allowed. Learned Single Judge set aside the endorsement dated 27.06.2023. A further direction was issued to the respondents-authorities to cover the employees of the petitioner-Union under the Karnataka Daily Wage Employees Welfare Act, 2012 from 15.02.2013 onwards and extend the benefits under the Act.

¶36

The petitioner is a Union of the daily rated workmen engaged

¶37

in the services under the respondents. These workmen had completed 7-8 years of service as on December-1988 which is the date of refusal to employ by the respondents. The dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal as Industrial Dispute No.503 of 1991. Award dated 31.08.1999 came to be passed in the said dispute granting relief of reinstatement and continuity of service.

¶38

One more dispute was raised in Industrial Dispute No.3 of 1990 for regularization, which was also answered in favour of the petitioner. These Awards became subject matter of series of litigations.

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶40

Finally, workmen in the petitioner's Union were reinstated in May2012 with continuity of service.

¶41

3.1 It was stated that the daily-wager workmen of petitioner's Union had completed 10 years of service as on 10.04.2006 and were working as on the date of commencement of the Act of 2012. The petitioner made several representations to extend the benefits of the said Act to the workmen employed by the respondents. The petitioner approached this Court in Writ Petition No.6237 of 2022 seeking writ of mandamus and this Court was pleased to allow the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the prayer in accordance with law as per order dated 29.03.2022.

¶42

3.2 After a lapse of 1 year and 3 months, the respondents issued endorsement dated 27.06.2023 rejecting the prayer for consideration of representation to cover them under the Act of 2012 with effect from 15.02.2013. On being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner challenged the said endorsement in the writ petition.

¶43

3.3 On the basis of the above facts, what was prayed in the petition was to set aside the endorsement dated 27.06.2023 and to

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶45

issue further direction to the respondents to cover the members of the petitioner-Union under the aforesaid Act of 2012 and pay the arrears along with interest of 10%.

¶46

The same grounds were urged by the appellant-State which were canvassed before learned Single Judge to oppose the prayer of the petitioner. It was submitted that the respondent-petitioner had approached this court by filing Writ Petition No.6237 of 2022 in which the authorities were directed to consider the request. The representation of the petitioner was considered and the prayer to cover the workmen under the Act was rejected in accordance with law. It was sought to be argued that the settlement arrived at between the parties was overlooked by learned Single Judge.

¶47

4.1 It was submitted that the Department of Archeology under which the employees concerned had been working were given the work for temporary period which was in respect of specified project work of excavation and that the employees were retained on daily wage basis. It was also sought to be contended that regularization could not have been directed as the funds were received from the State Government towards salary payable to the employees. It

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶49

was submitted that all the aspects have not been considered by learned Single Judge.

¶50

While allowing the petition to hold the employees of the petitioner-Union are entitled to the benefit, it was observed by learned Single Judge that the employees had put in service for more than 8 to 9 years as of 1990. It was observed that the fact they were employed on daily rated basis during the period from 1980-81 onwards is not disputed. The Karnataka Daily Wage Welfare Act, 2012 came into effect from 15.02.2013. At that stage, the workmen were in service, having been reinstated.

¶51

5.1 In the aforesaid, the contention of State Governmentappellant herein was negatived that the employees had not put in 10 years of service as on 10.04.2006. The workmen had joined the services as back as in the year 1980-81 and had completed 10 years of service when the Act came into force to make them entitled to the benefit.

¶52

5.1.1 Following was held by learned Single Judge to conclude that the endorsement and the reasons supplied therein were incorrect and misdirecting, extracting paragraph 8 from the order,

¶53

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:12693-DB WA No. 1204 of 2024

¶55

"The reason assigned in the endorsement that the workmen joined as daily wagers on 31.08.1999 is incorrect since the officer concerned has misdirected himself and has taken note of the date of the award as the date of joining as daily wagers and erroneously concluded that the workmen have not completed ten years of service as on 10.04.2006. On the contrary, the entire material on record would reveal that the workmen/daily wagers joined the services of the respondent during the year 198081 itself and the award dated: 31.08.1999 granting the relief of reinstatement, etc., clearly goes to show that they were continued to be in service from the year 1999 till the date of reinstatement i.e., May 2012. Hence, the reason assigned in the endorsement is ex-facie , illegal, and contrary to the awards passed by the Industrial Tribunal."

¶56

5.1.2 The finding of learned Single Judge that the employees who

¶57

were in service since 1980-81 had completed 10 years of service on the date of coming into force the Act, to be entitled to the benefit on the basis of 10 years and more service is eminently proper and eminates from the facts on record. This court is in agreement with the view taken by learned Single Judge.

¶58