Dismissed¶51

Town Municipal Corporation v. Shri. Veeraiah S

Karnataka HC9 Jun 2025WP/48668/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru (HC-KAR); NC: 2025:KHC:19511; WP No. 48668 of 2012 (L-TER); decided 09-06-2025 by Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde (single judge). Writ petition by Town Municipal Corporation, Hunsur challenging Labour Court, Mysore award dated 8-3-2012 in Reference No.88 of 2006 (Annexure-C) under Articles 226/227; dismissed as not surviving for consideration after petitioner's counsel filed memo stating the award is complied with; order dated 27-10-2023 taken on record; pending applications dismissed; no merits adjudication, no quantum.

What did the court decide?

In view of the petitioner's counsel's submission that the impugned award is complied with, and considering the order dated 27-10-2023 taken on record, the petition does not survive for consideration and is accordingly dismissed. ¶51

Town Municipal Corporation Vs Shri. Veeraiah S — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:19511 WP No. 48668 of 2012

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.48668 OF 2012 (L-TER)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

TOWN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HUNSUR MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 105 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI S.B. TOTAD, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SHRI. VEERAIAH S. S/O. SHRI. NANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

¶14

SHRI. AMAVASE S/O. SHRI. KUPPAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶15

Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

SHRI. R. RAMU S/O. SHRI. SATHYAMANGALADA RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

¶17

SHRI. SAATOORA SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

¶18

a. SMT. GEETHA W/O. LATE SHRI. SATOORA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.

¶19

b. MASTER VISHNU S/O. LATE SHRI. SATOORA AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS.

¶20

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19511 WP No. 48668 of 2012

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

c. MS. PAVITHRA D/O. LATE SATOORA AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS.

¶23

d. MASTER MAAGALI S/O. LATE SHRI. SATOORA

¶24

RESPONDENT NOS.4(a) TO (d) ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. GEETHA.

¶25

SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O. SHRI. KUPPAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶26

SHRI. DORESWAMY S/O. SHRI. BEGURU RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

¶27

SHRI. RANGA S/O. SHRI. NANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

¶28

SHRI. NANJA S/O. SRI CHIKKAKARUPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

¶29

SHRI. CHIKKAMANGALI S/O. SHRI. MAANKALI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

¶30

SHRI. RAMASWAMY S/O. SHRI. CHINNAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

¶31

SHRI. RAMESHA S/O. SHRI. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

¶32

SHRI. C. KRISHNA S/O. SHRI. CHIKKANANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:19511 WP No. 48668 of 2012

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 12 ARE RESIDING AT POURA KARMINKARA COLONY, HUNSUR MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 105.

¶37

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSORE DISTRICT MYSORE - 570 024.

¶38

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶39

…RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SMT. PRATHIBA R.K., A.G.A., FOR R-14, SRI R. PRAMOD, ADVOCATE, FOR R-9 & 10, & R-1 TO R-3, R-5 TO R-8 & R-11 TO 13 ARE SERVED)

¶41

¶42

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE AWARD DATED 8-3-2012 PASSED IN REFERENCE NO.88 OF 2006 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR COURT, MYSORE, AS PER ANNEXURE-C.

¶43

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶45

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:19511 WP No. 48668 of 2012

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

ORAL ORDER

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo

¶50

stating that the award passed by the Labour Court, which is impugned in the writ petition, is complied. Thus, he would submit that the petitioner would not proceed with the matter.

¶51

The Court has perused the copy of the order dated 27-10-2023, which is made available today. Same is taken on record. Considering the submission and the order dated 27-10-2023, this Court is of the view that the petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed .

¶52

In view of the dismissal of the petition, pending applications, if any, shall stand dismissed.

¶53

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

¶54

KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Town Municipal Corporation v. Shri. Veeraiah S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Town Municipal Corporation v. Shri. Veeraiah S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sri Banappa S/O Pandith Lakshmaiah Vs Sri D Thimmapaiah S/O Late Dasappa

Sri Lakshmana Vs Sri a Ramaiah

Chandrappa S/O Late Dasthimmaiah Vs Lingaiah S/O Dasthimmaiah

Jade Muniyappa Vs Smt Gowramma

M/S Scorpio Engineering (P) Ltd. Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Central Board of Trustees Epf Vs M/S Konega International (P) Limited