Petitioner challenged entitlement to continuous service benefits post-superannuation. Court relied on final judgment in W.P. No. 2714 of 2004 and dismissed the writ petition.
Petitioner not entitled to be treated as in-service after 2001; writ petition dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 26584 of 2012
Date : 11.4.2017
Between :
Bodukunta Lingaiah S/o Durgaiah R/o Near Navodaya Private School Vepal, Kalyankhani, Adilabad district
Petitioner
And
The chief Manager, The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd Kothagudem, Khammam district and another
Respondents
The Court made the following:
2
PNRJ WP 26584 of 2012
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 26584 of 2012
ORAL ORDER:
Petitioner was dismissed from service by the respondent company on 25.7.2001 on the allegation of habitual absenteeism. Challenging the order of dismissal, petitioner raised Industrial Dispute in L.C.I.D No. 270 of 2001 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Hyderabad (for short the Tribunal). The Tribunal vide its award dated 20.7.2002 modified the order of dismissal and directed reinstatement in the minimum of scale of revised pay as applicable and put him in minimum muster rolls for three consecutive years; his entire service from 1976 would be calculated for terminal benefits. Aggrieved thereby, respondent company filed W P No. 2714 of 2004 . As no stay was granted by this Court, during the pendency of the above writ petition, on 28.6.2006 the order of reinstatement was passed, however, having realized that petitioner attained the age of superannuation in the normal course on 30.4.2006, the order of reinstatement was revoked. The writ petition was disposed of by order dated 20.10.2010. Learned single Judge, having taken note of the fact that petitioner worked for 25 years, modified the punishment of dismissal to that of compulsory retirement. The award passed by the Tribunal was set aside and petitioner company was directed to substitute the punishment and calculate the pensionary/ retirement benefits due and payable to the petitioner for the services rendered by him from 1976 to 2001.
3
PNRJ WP 26584 of 2012
to 2001 and petitioner is not entitled to any other benefits. Learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned standing counsel for respondent company, fairly submitted that the benefits payable to the petitioner in terms of the judgment of this Court in W P No. 2714 of 2004 were already settled.
______________ P NAVEEN RAO,J
DATE: 11.4.2017
TVK
4
PNRJ WP 26584 of 2012
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 26584 of 2012
Date : 11.4.2017
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner entitled to treatment as in-service after attaining age of superannuation despite previous judgment of this Court.
Bodukunta Lingaiah
The chief Manager, The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd
Another
P. Naveen Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
