The Divisional Controller vs Malkappa And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 22395 Kant

Karnataka High Court

The Divisional Controller vs Malkappa And Ors on 3 September, 2024

Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda

Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda

                                             -1-
                                                         NC: 2024:KHC-K:6587
                                                     WP No. 202158 of 2021




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                         DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

                                           BEFORE

                         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

                         WRIT PETITION NO.202158 OF 2021 (L-KSRTC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
                   NWKRTC, VIJAYAPURA DIVISION,
                   ATHANI ROAD,
                   VIJAYAPURA.


                                                               ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. DEEPAK V BARAD, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    MALKAPPA S/O BHIMRAY KAMBOGI,
Digitally signed         OCC.EX-DRIVER,
by SUMITRA               SINCE DECEASED BY LR'S.
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH     1a. SHIVARAJ S/O MALAKAPPA KAMBOGI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA              AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE
                       AT POST. PADAGANUR,
                       TQ. SINDAGI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586127.

                   1b. SHIVARAJ S/O MALAKAPPA KAMBOGI
                       AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT,
                       AT POST PADAGANUR,
                       TQ.SINDAGI,
                       DIST.VIJAYAPURA- 586127.

                   1c.   BHIMASHANKAR S/O MALAKAPPA KAMBOGI
                         AGE 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
                            -2-
                                      NC: 2024:KHC-K:6587
                                   WP No. 202158 of 2021




     AT POST. PADAGNUR,
     TQ.SINDAGI,
     DIST.VIJAYAPURA-586127.


                                          ...RESPONDENTS

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN
THE NATURE OF      CERTIORARI WHEREBY     QUASHING   THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, AT
KALABURAGI DATED 17.11.2020 IN REFERENCE NO. 4/2018
AS AT ANNEXURE-D TO THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC.


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


CORAM:   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

                      ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)

1. The NEKRTC has filed this writ petition challenging

the order of the Labour Court by which the Labour Court

has set aside the order of dismissal and it has also held

that the deceased workman would not be entitled for back

wages. But it has directed the Corporation to make

payment of all monetary benefits to which the deceased

was entitled to, up to the date of his death and also

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6587

consider one of the legal representatives of the deceased

petitioner for being appointed on compassionate grounds.

2. The record reveals that the workman was terminated

because he remained unauthorizedly absent for two

months. In my view, having regard to this allegation and

also taking into consideration that the workman is no more

and that no back wages has been ordered, this would not

be a fit case to entertain this writ petition.

3. It is to be noticed here that the labour Court has only

directed consideration of the claim of the legal

representative of the deceased workman for compassion

appointment as in paragraph No.35 of its Order and this

direction to consider their case, would also not in any way

prejudice to the NEKRTC.

4. As a consequence of the termination order being set

aside, it is also necessary that NEKRTC should settle all

the terminal benefits to the legal representatives of the

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6587

deceased and therefore, a direction given in this regard

cannot also be found fault with.

5. In that view of the matter, there is no merit to

entertain the writ petition and the Writ Petition is therefore

dismissed.

Sd/-

(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

DHA